Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clone Manga


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. No consensus that the Joe Shuster Awards automatically confer notability, and no other indication that the subject passes WP:WEB. — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 13:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)

Clone Manga

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Fails WP:WEB, all sources are primary, no secondary sourcing found. Having another webcomic's creator praise you does not equal notability. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 19:30, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:35, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Question: I'm doing a bit of a search on the Joe Shuster Award and I'm not seeing where this is so tremendously notable that winning one would keep the article on that merit alone. It does somewhat extend notability but I'm not seeing where it's tremendously notable. As far as webcomic creators go, Fred Gallagher is pretty notable in the webcomic world and is one of the very, very few people I'd consider to be notable enough to have a blog count towards notability. I'll see what I can do for the article, but offhand this needs pretty much an almost complete rewrite in many sections. It reads like a fan page rather than an encyclopedic entry. It's pretty puffy in places.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 03:35, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I nuked a good deal of the article, as it was pretty non-neutral. I also removed the webcomic info boxes because the info could be best represented in the individual sections and the sections themselves were pretty slim after having the fan content removed.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:23, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Also of note is that the compilation of Paper Eleven seems to have been self-published. I state this because I know at one point having your webcomics published in paper format was something that gave automatic notability. I don't think this is still the standard, but I wanted to voice that this was self-published through Lulu.04:28, 4 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. I looked for sources but was ultimately unable to find enough to show that either the artist or the website has enough notability to pass WP:GNG. In the end all we have is an endorsement by Fred Gallagher and the Joe Shuster Awards. Neither one is enough in and of themselves notable enough to keep the article based upon that alone. They both count towards notability but they're not enough to be so overwhelmingly notable that I'd say "absolute keep", and by this I mean specifically the awards. They're not non-descript awards but I don't really see where they're considered to be along the lines of an Eisner Award, for example. They give notability but not Notability, if that makes any sense. That being said, if someone could find a few more sources to show notability I'd be willing to change my vote, but offhand I couldn't really find where this webcomic is being covered in multiple independent and reliable sources. There's plenty of fan chatter, but not really in any formats that would count towards notability. I have absolutely no problem with someone wanting to userfy this content until more sources become available if this were to get deleted.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:52, 4 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep I think with the Joe Shuster award. It's prestiguous enough, I believe. I think Dan Kim's comics also won some other awards. Anyone want to dig a bit to see if anything turns up? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.91.15 (talk) 06:56, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep: Needs a clean up definitely. The comic won three of those Shuester awards and I think self publication still holds up in notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.116.0.29 (talk) 07:22, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The problem I ran into with the Schuster award is that there is little to no coverage of the award. Normally when an award is notable enough to warrant keeping an article on that basis alone, there's a ton of coverage for the award and usually at least a little coverage for the persons winning the awards in something other than a primary source. That just doesn't seem to exist in this situation, which is why I had to go through the Schuster award site for this. I would also like to add that this isn't a vote and that you'll have to find coverage in multiple independent and reliable sources to show that this award is notable enough to give absolute notability to where the award alone would keep the entry.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 08:42, 6 September 2012 (UTC)


 * The Shuster Awards has its own wikipedia article, though. Doesn't that help in giving it notability? :/ When debating deleting other webcomics on the basis of 'the awards not being notable enough', which most only had one, they ended up remaining up due to being notable in that the awards had their own wikipedia page. The criteria for notability don't say that something needs to have multiple awards or that they have to be recent.
 * Not necessarily. I've noticed that the argument for that is flawed because sometimes those awards aren't as notable as the articles would have you believe. If there was more coverage of this award in various sources I'd be more inclined to believe that a Wikipedia article equals notability, but there just isn't really that much out there about the award. A search brought up just under 50K worth of ghits and only a few handfuls of news sources. While that doesn't necessarily mean that the award can't be notable, it was enough to make me wonder if the award was major enough to be so notable that it'd keep the article based on the award alone. Most awards aren't at the level of major notability that merely winning the award keeps the article in and of itself. That's what my argument sort of surrounds: the award does seem to help notability but I don't know that it's so major that it'd keep the article on that basis alone. If you can bring up enough to show that the award is overwhelmingly notable I'd be willing to capitulate, but considering that this award has been around for eight years and has gotten such limited coverage is a little concerning to me.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 18:19, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Not really? Just because the award's only been around for eight years doesn't negate its importance. I think that if the awards themselves are important enough to warrant a page then being a winner of said award should be enough to count as notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.71.91.15 (talk) 21:52, 6 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Never assume that having an article gives notability. It could just mean that the article hasn't come up for deletion yet and to be honest, I've been debating nominating it because there just isn't a lot of coverage for this award to show that it really deserves an article. That's ultimately my concern here, that the award isn't really all that notable and that there's ZERO coverage of Kim winning the awards in independent and reliable sources. If you want to prove that the award is notable, work on showing coverage for the award. Other than trivial mentions of the award in relation to other people, I'm not seeing a lot of notability.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:33, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I didn't say that just having an article created means it is notable. However, in this case, I would say that his comics winning multiple Shuester Awards might give it more notability than many other webcomics that still have articles and aren't being debated for deletion.


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -Scottywong | confer _ 16:21, 12 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - I'm going to have to go with Tokyogirl79 on this one. I personally don't feel that Fred Gallagher plugging the author in one of his daily blogs comes close to providing the notability needed for the site to meet the notability criteria for websites, so that pretty much leaves the Joe Shuster awards.  And Tokyogirl79 makes a very compelling case as to why winning the award is still not quite enough to establish notability.  And on top of that, I'm having difficulty finding any other reliable sources that talk about the site at all.  Rorshacma (talk) 16:58, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - A lack of any significant third party sources aside from brief mentions on the illusive awards website suggest this company has yet to break into any format that would have it meet WP:ORG. Mkdw talk 00:14, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Winning multiple Shuester Awards gives it a leg up in notability, I believe. There's other webcomics on here that have less sources and even no awards won, yet they haven't been deleted. I'd like to add that based on a guidelines, notability can be established by winning a prestigous award which are covered by a wiki article of their own. I might try to look for some more sources, but this should be enough. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Super-staff (talk • contribs) 04:32, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS Mkdw talk 06:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.