Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kid Radd


 * 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. In the battle of policy and logic versus accusations and blank retorts, policy always wins. Yank sox 19:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Kid Radd

 * — (View AfD)

Comics assertion of notability is a nomination for a WCCA and two reviews by non-notable sites. As far as I'm aware, that's insufficient to meet WP:WEB. Brad Beattie (talk) 15:44, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep. Why not delete Penny Arcade, Megatokyo, and PvP for all it's worth? --Æ AUSSIE evil Æ 19:05, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Why not give an actual reason? Instead of a meaningless blank comment. Because the best the article can come up with is a nomination for an arbitrarily trivial webcomic award. -hahnch e  n 20:27, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. The reviews are not from reliable sources, and the nomination falls just shy of the WP:WEB criterion of winning an award. -- Kicking222 23:11, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Losing this article would only harm Wikipedia as a reference work. It had a substantial following and its design is - if such a strong word is merited - unique. To the best of my knowledge, Kid Radd is also the most sophisticated pixel art webcomic in existence, and it is the only one on Wikipedia that incorporates animation, so deletion would create a substantial gap in our coverage of the art form. --Kizor 02:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, the difference between this and Penny Arcade (webcomic) would be that the Penny Arcade has sources like Entertainment Weekly and MTV. The Difference between this and Megatokyo would be that Megatokyo has been in The New York Times. For this article, we appear to have to resort to original research, wikipedia editors' points of view, and unreliable sources. That doesn't meet our content policies. -- Dragonfiend 06:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, per Dragonfiend. --MattShepherd 21:38, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, per Kizor. Kid Radd is undoubtedly a revolutionary webcomic with unparalleled presentation. If nothing else, it deserves a Wikipedia article. >_> 72.231.145.5 22:07, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, I personally believe that this article was nominated simply out of bias against sprite based webcomics. The difference between this sprite based web comic and most others is that content is orignal, hand drawn by the author. Not only that, but the author also arranged a clever html setup designed to save bandwidth for slower users, which not only allowed for easy animation in certain strips, it even allowed for the use music and was responcible for the creation of original music made just for the Kid Radd comic inself. As well as those other points, Kid Radd also presented unique story that not only served for a comedy but for emotional drama as well. Ten Surp
 * Comment. Please assume good faith. I nominated this article based on the criteria in WP:WEB. --Brad Beattie (talk) 02:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * What he said. I know how tempers can flare up in a deletion debate, but BradBeattie has concerned himself with inclusion criteria and not showed any kind of sprite comic bias. --Kizor 03:21, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Should the criteria listed in WP:WEB alone be used to determind whether a web-based article should be deleted or not? If something is popular enough people are going to look for it's information on it and nine times out of ten they going to go to Wikipedia. If the article is deleted, sooner or later someone is going to recreate the article. I apologized if my first comment violated AGF. But a quick question, bias against sprite comics may be what I assumed, but who here thinks the article should be deleted simply because it falls short of a set of rules that prioritizes independent notiblity over popularity to may be attributed to a clut following? --Ten Surp
 * That's what we're here to find out. --Kizor 10:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Anomo 21:33, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. --Easyas12c 22:29, 10 December 2006 (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.