Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Our Home Planet


 * 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. -R. fiend 07:00, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Our Home Planet
A non notable webcomic with a lot of crufty information in, found here. Alexa gives back a ranking of over 1 million for its main site, and no data for all other mirrors. A google search for "our home planet" webcomic, gives just over 60 links, and there I found no assertion of notability on Google. As of writing, there is no version of this at comixPedia, where it belongs. - Hahnchen 18:34, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * nn. Delete. - --CastAStone 18:39, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to the Comixpedia Webcomic Wiki and delete. --Carnildo 21:48, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. If you people are going to continue using the useless and easily exploitable Alexa site to measure popularity, I'll never cease to question the competence of the Webcomics Wikipedia Staff. Also remember the comic is weekly and its statistics won't be as high as comics that update every single day.  The comic has been online almost 4 years and has built up one of the larger archives compared to most weekly comics.  Despite what Alexa tells you, GD is hardly an unknown, and even runs one of the most popular Oekaki sites online.  He is more hard-working and knowledgable than most of the artists that are considered "noteable" on Wikipedia. --SuperHappy 23:50, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This vote is Special:Contributions/SuperHappy's 17th edit.
 * Excuse me for having a life outside Wikipedia, douchebag.
 * I can vouch that User:SuperHappy isn't a sock. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 06:49, 11 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. Unless wikipedia is too serious for webcomics altogether. Which does not seem to be the case... Agreed on the irrelevance of Alexa ratings. It seems to me the deletion request is motivated by subjective dislike for the subject matter. --Komikksu 17:37, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This vote is Special:Contributions/Komikksu's first edit.


 * Keep Meets Proposal B, and agreed about Alexa. -Abe Dashiell 18:46, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Abe Dashiell. Dread Lord C y b e r S k u l l ✎☠ 00:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - Proposal B is totally out of order. What sort of notability is there here?  Are we saying Wikipedia is a place where every comic which has been around for over 100 strips gains an article?  What about bar room bands who have been around for a while.  What about bloggers with 500 posts?  Longevity as people seem to claim here, is not an instant claim to fame.  Has this strip been mentioned anywhere outside the webcomic community?  Has it received critical feedback and reviews from other respected journals/publications/magazines?  Proposal B, just claims that if a webcomic exists, then it warrants an article.  And people are agreeing?  People have been attacking me from nominating webcomics, because of a personal dislike?  This is totally incorrect, I was just pretty shocked when I saw the List of webcomics article at the amount of cruft that had been let in, which would have been deleted if it were any other category.  Alexa is not definitive, that is easy to see, but to have a rank of over 1 million is pretty poor.  Any reasonably popular webcomic would have a ranking a lot higher.  With non webcomic websites, anything over 1 million would be deleted.  How is this webcomic more notable than Fleetwood Back, a Fleetwood Mac tribute band, who play local venues in Scarborough?  It's time we changed the webcomic guidelines in line with other Wikipedia guidelines. - Hahnchen 16:44, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Hahnchen, just because you haven't heard of GD or Our Home Planet in whatever little retarded circle of webcomics YOU pay attention to doesn't mean they're unimportant. And I find it really hard to believe that your opinion of Our Home Planet has nothing to do with this nomination.  If Proposal B is going to be ignored from now on, throw Proposal A out to, for being completely USELESS.  You're not getting the picture here.  Alexa is not even a REMOTELY good source to measure website readership.  Seeing you obsessively stick to it, despite a great number of people telling you why you shouldn't, makes you look like an ignorant little brat.  INCIDENTALLY, GD recently changed its domain name to one Alexa isn't even tracking yet, which would make whatever number you're seeing even more wildly innacurate than normal.  But since you seem to be ignoring every argument against you, it doesn't matter.  The webcomic listing won't be fixed until it represents your narrow view of what's important.
 * Come to think of it, what webcomics DO you read, Hahnchen? If your answer is "just Penny Arcade and Ctrl-Alt-Del", please do us all a favor and get out. --SuperHappy 00:42, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Hi SuperHappy, I at least read a bunch of webcomics, including some of yours. That doesn't mean I think it's the purpose of this encyclopedia to list every webcomic in existence. We're trying to discuss the inclusion criteria on WP:COMIC and come to some consensus, but swearing at someone who's trying to maintain some uniform standard of notability for all wikipedia articles (not just webcomics) isn't going to help.  -- SCZenz 01:50, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Haha... Fine, fine... swears have been edited. But let it be known that Hahnchen clearly knows nothing about webcomics, and seeing him beng allowed to assert so much authority on them is puzzling, to say the least. --SuperHappy 03:30, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I think I understand why this debate is so divisive, and I'm trying to work to resolve it. I've written you a note about it on your talk page, SuperHappy. -- SCZenz 03:47, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Wow Superhappy, thanks for the character assassination. What does it matter what I read, what I eat and what I like?  You have asserted no mention of notability anywhere in your arguments, apart from the size of its archive, and that GD is a hardworking guy.  You've got the argument the wrong way round, I do not read Our Home Planet, but that is NOT the reason I nominated it.  There are so many bands that I have never heard of or never listened to, and yet if theres a verifiable assertion of notability, I would not delete it.  What the argument should be, is "Just because you're a fan of the comic, is that the reason it should be kept?" - Hahnchen 14:40, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. All three criteria listed in the helpful template above are far too lenient.  Bottom line is, there's no evidence presented that this comic is notable. -- SCZenz 17:52, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, does not meet any reasonable standards for notability. -Sean Curtin 19:43, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless some proponent can reasonably explain why this subject matters and has truly touched people somehow. Peter S. 22:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets all three listed proposals with new domain. Deleting this article is less efficient than it is pedantic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.47.82.254 (talk • contribs) 15:53, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * In the future, please sign your comments with four tildes, like this: ~ -- SCZenz 16:03, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. A webcomic has no more automatic claim to notability than any other random website; and certainly a random website like this would need more than just extended existance and continuous updates to be notable. --Aquillion 21:58, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Until such time as WikiProject Webcomics decides to develop guidelines that include independent verification of a webcomics importance pages like this should be treated as just another website. --Allen3 talk 23:55, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unencyclopedic topic. No claim to notability. Christopher Parham (talk) 06:45, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as a webcomic with no claim to notability. I've removed webcomic notability, as it's currently a summary of three proposed guidelines, meaning that there's not yet any consensus supporting them. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 06:49, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Completely non-notable. Pokemon and high schools are giants of modern culture compared to this. Ashibaka (tock) 23:30, 12 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Juvenile. Especially coming from someone whose crowning achievement is writing the entry for Cardcaptor Sakura.
 * And when this webcomic is as newsworthy or influential as Cardcaptor Sakura, it will merit a Wikipedia article. - A Man In Black (conspire | past ops) 00:01, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * You should have noted the quote on the bottom of my userpage: Mate, keeping or deleting an article is not an insult to whatever the article's about. I'm not notable, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest ;-) --fuddlemark Ashibaka (tock) 16:35, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn. Dragonfiend 03:48, 14 October 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.