Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manascrewed (webcomic)


 * 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 of the debate was delete. Although a close decision, I am concerned about potential sock/meatpuppets affecting the comments, and I find more credible arguments from the side claiming this is a vanity page. (ESkog)(Talk) 21:06, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Manascrewed
Doesn't appear to meet WP:WEB, no other claim to notability suggested. Vanity, created by web-comic's author. User42 08:13, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * This has been listed on WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 11:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment FYI, this isn't actually the second AfD for the comic. The first one was for the actual term used by Magic: The Gathering players. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 11:01, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, agree with User42's reasons. -- Dragonfiend 13:39, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I have placed a copy of this article on Comixpedia. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 16:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Absolutely no assertion of notability, Alexa rank is around 3 million. Maybe we should have articles on separate drops of the ocean? - Hahnch  e  n 17:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I have moved this page to "Manascrewed (webcomic)" to differentiate it from the prior unrelated nomination. Dread Lord C y b e r S k u l l ✎☠ 20:14, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. "Small cult following" tells it all. Fagstein 02:25, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Vanity is a serious accusation. Can the Nom prove it? Dread Lord C y b e r S k u l l ✎☠ 00:11, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The article was created by User:Anthson. Anthson is the author's screen-name, see a forum post here. He also notes it in the blog. User42 00:34, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Soft Keep: Though only because I'm opposed to the wanton killing off of articles for "obscure" webcomics in general. This one is niche but seems to be updating on a reliable schedule, which is (IMHO) an indication of a positive future for a webcomic.  On the other hand it seems to be attracting vandals, presumably these londes.com people that Jansky thinks are so against him. Vanity confirmed, author cops to it on his blog.  Is that hugely important when there are other editors?--Khaighle 03:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep: I'm voting keep for several reasons. Yes, the author of the wiki is the guy who originally created the comic, and yes, that's a potential issue. However, the comic is notable enough, relevant to Magic- Wizards of the Coast has several people say they read his comic, including Aaron Forsythe, who linked to Manascrewed in an article on the official site.  I think this is reason enough to keep despite the fact that it's a niche comic and that the author created the wiki.  The vandalism alone shows that it is notable enough to be targeted. ChocoCid 17:48, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * This is the above user's very first edit. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 20:51, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Or you could cross-check with IP addresses and see that I've probably made a dozen edits, I just never bothered to log in to make most of my edits. Plus, my account's been around longer than this AFD has been up, which is what Wikipedia policy states is important. If you're going to accuse me of being a sock puppet, you really should do a bit of checking. ChocoCid 20:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I never accused you of being a sockpuppet, I simply pointed out a fact. I apologise if I have offended you. I'm not aware of any policy that says what is important. According to the deletion policy it's down to the closing admin to decide where community consensus lies. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 20:45, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Actually one of my favorite online comics. However, it isn't notable enough to merit inclusion per WP:WEB. Being linked to by Wizards of the Coast may make it notable within the world of magic players or the magic internet community but not in general. The fact the the author created the article also counts in favour of deletion. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 20:51, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I agree with ChocoCid. The entry was indeed created by the author of the webcomic, but the webcomic is also relevant in the Magic: The Gathering community.  1,000 readers a day seems like it seems pretty "notable" to me.  Plenty of other articles on wikipedia are only relevant to a niche, and they are permitted to exist.--Tahngarth
 * Weak keep The link from Wizards caught my attention. Perhaps more ideal than keeping it now may be to give it a delete without prejudice.  The Magic audience is sizable, so it's a pretty big niche.  It's likely that the comic will grow in significance, but it seems a little early at this point. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 12:47, 6 June 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.