Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obscured by species


 * 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 speedy delete as a re-creation of. &mdash;Cryptic (talk) 15:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Obscured by species
NN webcomic - the article even admits it's obscure. AFD'ing rather than speedy-ing in case anyone can prove otherwise 23skidoo 04:47, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete - I am swinging on this, so I will just go over my reasons in point form:
 * Why it is worth deleting:
 * Alexa rank of 3 million
 * not listed in topwebcomics.com's top 100
 * its forum is empty
 * only 51 unique google hits
 * Their main page talks about advertising
 * They go on about being published, yet only have 1 edition published.
 * Why it is worth keeping:
 * 17,000 google hits
 * It is available for sale (hence not just a web comic)
 * In the end, it looks too much like advertising for mine. So I am going with delete. Zordrac  (talk) Wishy Washy  Darwikinian Eventualist 07:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete per above. Eusebeus 09:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per the article's self-description as "somehwhat obscure." Thanks for the supporting research, Zordrac. Durova 09:33, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * delete very nearly nom'd this one myself. BL   kiss the lizard  12:01, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, webcomic vanity. &mdash; J I P  | Talk 18:31, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * 17,000 Googles, of which 50 are unique. Saberwyn - 22:04, 15 December 2005 (UTC)
 * So what's your vote? 23skidoo 05:56, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I have to vote? I have no interest in the fate of this article either way; I was just curious, and found that one of the facts provided to keep was incorrect, and wished to make a note of it for those users who concern themselves with the fate of this article. Saberwyn - 12:15, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Fair enough -- I wasn't sure whether your comment was just that or if you were trying to support one side or the other. Cheers. 23skidoo 13:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Question Are we saying Webcomics are not valid for inclusion in Wiki here?
 * No, we are saying that this particular webcomic is not suitable for inclusion on Wikipedia. Check out the Webcomics section of WP:WEB to see what a webcomic has to achieve to be suitable for inclusion. Saberwyn - 12:15, 16 December 2005 (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.