Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leftover Soup


 * 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. None of the keep rationales - that webcomics/art forms have a lower threshold of notability than other objects - is just wrong. As various people have noted, the GNG applies here, and is not met. ItsZippy (talk • contributions) 12:31, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Leftover Soup

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

No indication of notability, and I cannot find significant coverage in independent sources. Contested prod. ... disco spinster   talk  17:42, 12 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:52, 12 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. I can find some coverage in independent sources, but just blogs and the like - nothing that would vaguely resemble a reliable source. Robofish (talk) 22:05, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * "This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia." This is a web-comic. It does not require the same amount of source debate that is used to consider a generic article. There is no reason for this article to be removed. Do not delete it. 06:49, 15 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.191.145.194 (talk)
 * The fact that the article is under the purview of a WikiProject is utterly irrelevant to notability. And, as there is no WP:NWEBCOMICS, it must meet the WP:GNG; your statment that it "does not require the same amount of...debate...[as] a generic article" is patently false. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:56, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Comics, whether print or web-based, are a form of art. They are not science and facts that must have research and proof. Art is self-contained and intellectual property. Certain leeways are granted for certain projects, such as this one. This project is here because there are thousands of comics printed by small-press publishers, and just because they are not printed by the New York Times does not mean that they do not deserve to be known. Wiki is trying to list them so they can become more known, eventually perhaps even gaining notariaty. By all means go ahead and put up a flag that articles like this need to be expanded, but do not remove the articles just because you don't read the comics in question. Removing comic project articles due to low notability would render the entire project barren. Tremas Koschei (talk) 04:10, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. No coverage in reliable sources means this definitely misses WP:GNG. Contrary to the above assertion that "there are thousands of comics printed by small-press publishers ... Wiki is trying to list them so they can become more known", in fact Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion. See WP:NOTADVERTISING. Rangoondispenser (talk) 13:54, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - I can find no reliable sources to show any sort of notability. It utterly fails the GNG, and it is ridiculous to try to assert that articles on certain subjects are somehow exempt from the general notability guidelines.  Rorshacma (talk) 17:20, 19 July 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.