Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finding Molly: An Adventure In Catsitting


 * 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. Kurykh (talk) 00:51, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

Finding Molly: An Adventure In Catsitting

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unable to find any reliable sources documenting this topic, reviews from RS publications, or even anything RS (after a cursory search) about the author. It appears to be a non-notable webcomic that was printed from a kickstarter campaign.- Ich (talk) 22:06, 11 January 2017 (UTC) Ich (talk) 22:06, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 22:15, 11 January 2017 (UTC)


 * "Any" is a big word. IGN looks good, I don't know if Entertainment Monthly is reliable but the article looks good, GeekDad may be reliable, and I don't know if Goodreads is a reliable source but it looks like something. This is four sources, only one of which I am completely sure that it is reliable. None of the sources that I commonly come across while searching for webcomic sources have ever mentioned it... I agree with the delete, though I think it's pretty close. It's simply too difficult to write an article with just these sources. ~ Mable ( chat ) 13:07, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I saw the IGN article but wasn't sure that it was a staff writer or user-generated content. The others I am not familiar with. I still couldn't find any coverage in traditional media.- Ich (talk) 21:00, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment Even the IGN article, while the text seems fine, appears to be from a rare contributor at IGN, 7 reviews in all, who is unable to give ratings that aren't 4 or 4.5 stars.  .  The concern that this article might not be from a general staff member of IGN seems at least plausible. --joe deckertalk 02:28, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NasssaNser (talk/edits) 05:10, 19 January 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 05:53, 27 January 2017 (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.