Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Goblins (webcomic) (2nd nomination)


 * 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 no consensus. ✗ plicit  03:58, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Goblins (webcomic)
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The awards stated are not major industry awards per WP:NWEB. One of them was just an honor given by a convention one year. The only secondary sources are Sequential Tart (flagged as unreliable) and what appears to be a single person's blog. I found no reliable sources whatsoever in a WP:BEFORE. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:17, 10 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 03:51, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation and Webcomics. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 03:17, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete – Besides the Sequential Tart article, which was discussed here without a specific conclusion, I found this Ars Technica listicle as a reliable source. There's also this Comix Mix article, but I don't know about that one either ^_^; – I will add that Goblins was nominated for an Aurora Award this year as well, but I don't know about the significance of this. I'll be really sad to see this article go :( ~ Maplestrip/Mable ( chat ) 17:35, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Relisting comment: to see if we can avoid a weak no-consensus Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star   Mississippi  01:31, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Possible keep, but a substantial rewrite would be needed. This is a winner of the Aurora Awards. (It's also been nonminated again this year, with winners yet to be announced.) Winning a well-known award such as this is a way to establish notability under the specific notability criteria for web content. Based on this and a few other pieces of coverage, I personally would be comfortable considering this subject notable. That said, the quality of the article is poor, with much unsourced material that might fall foul of the requirements for biographies of living persons. If kept, it should be substantially cut back and/or rewritten. HenryCrun15 (talk) 05:41, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. IMHO winning a notable award (AA) is sufficient to estabilish weak notability. That said, I acknowledge that per prior discussions, this is not an obvious reading of WP:GNG. Nonetheless, combinining this with cited coverage (AT, etc.) does amount to borderline notability in my book. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:23, 18 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.