Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jaded


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was No consensus, which defaults to keep. Ral 315   WS  02:13, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

The Jaded
See the webcomic here and their one man band forum here. Webcomics reach their end user purely through the means of the internet, so Alexa ranking is a good way of finding out how popular one is. When you have a ranking of over 2 million, this is clearly not good. This is a none notable webcomic with a tiny readership, and with 2 million more popular sites out there, it's time to remove this from wikipedia. - Hahnchen 00:07, 26 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Question. The rank only hints at the lowness of the readership. How big is the readership, actually? Moreover, does size of participation or readership necessarily determine notability?   &mdash; Rickyrab | Talk 00:21, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, maybe delete, on notability grounds.   &mdash; Rickyrab | Talk 00:32, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Reply - That could be a point. But try looking on Google for the jaded and webcomic.  It has not received any outside press, it hasn't even won any community awards I think, which almost every webcomic wins some.  It's true, there are notable films, books etc, which may have been notable but not well read/seen.  I do not think however, that this case holds true for this webcomic. - Hahnchen 00:33, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Alexa rank. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 00:52, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Jwissick  (t)  (c)  00:57, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Alexa is in general a horrible way of determining popularity or notability, since it is not based on visitors, but on visitors who chose to install a specific piece of spyware. Also note that "The Jaded" is mostly read through Graphic Smash, so Alexa would treat such visits as results for graphicsmash.com, not for thejaded.co.uk, further biasing the Alexa results. Even aside from all that, this article is verifiable, encyclopedic, and useful. There are absolutely no disadvantages to keeping it in Wikipedia, so it should not be deleted. Factitious 01:07, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I understand that Alexa rankings can sometimes be a red herring. However, doing a Google search found nothing to distinguish this from any other website.  Apart from the Google search mentioned above, I was also drawn to nominate this due to the sparcity of the forums.  I know not everyone joins the forums, but surely a proportion of the readership will join up.  I did not know about GraphicSmash, that is true, and whereas you have mentioned the nature of Alexa, I do have to point out that Alexa ranks GraphicSmash at over 700k. - Hahnchen 01:22, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Alexa's ranking of Graphic Smash is also unreliable, of course. But even if we had good reasons for thinking the comic had a low readership, I still don't see any claims being made as to disadvantages of keeping this article. Are there any disadvantages? Factitious 01:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The disadvantage is, that instead of wikipedia being used as an encyclopedia, it is used as a web directory, free advertising, personal space and yellow pages. Would an article on myself be a disadvantage to wikipedia?  It's verifiable, and useful for potential employers or friends, I'm sure a lot more people know of me in real life then read this comic. - Hahnchen 01:53, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * It also has a low Netcraft ranking -- ReyBrujo 03:34, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Graphic Smash comics (which I personally think are notable) require subscribership to GS to read the archives of, hence the relatively low readership. Nifboy 01:41, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I understand that, looking at the site, but what is the difference between one unnotable website within a gated community and one unnotable website outside it? - Hahnchen 01:53, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete no claims to notability, and alexa ranks and google search suggest otherwise. --best, kevin · · · Kzollman | Talk · · · 02:02, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with Graphic Smash. It's not notable on its own, even in the context of the webcomics community. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 03:51, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - nn CLW 06:20, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable as defined by Alexa ranking. Furthermore, if this AfD deletion suceeds, remove all redlinks from the Graphics Smash page until such time as good articles (or even decent stubs) are written about the more notable comics. --Icelight 06:58, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * The Alexa rating is irrelevant in this case. The lion's share of the readers are going to be looking at it at graphicsmash.com, not its own site. It is unlike Keenspot and like Keenspace, in this way. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 09:00, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * In which case we can't really verify if it has a major following, except possibly through the forums, which do seem pretty sparse, and are an even less reliable method. --Icelight 16:01, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Which would be why I suggested merging it into GraphicSmash, myself. I don't think it's notable, but Alexa numbers are irrelevant. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 16:03, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Okay, so, failing a succesful Delete motion, I'd go for Merge and Redirect, but still remove the redlinks.
 * Merge with Graphic Smash and Redirect. Atomization of comic-related subjects is rampaging and clogging WP with minor nn articles. Shauri 19:40, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Relevant. --Ezeu 20:32, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Relevant. Wiki is not paper. ≈ jossi ≈ 20:33, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Looks notable Ryan Norton T 20:53, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - I am not an avid webcomic reader. I nominated this purely because I thought it was none notable.  May I ask why a comic on GraphicSmash is inherently notable?  GraphicSmash itself doesn't seem to be that popular from its Alexa rank, so why would a specific comic on that site be? - Hahnchen 21:49, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. as per nom. DirectorStratton 02:51, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Attention - Some users have said that comics on Graphic Smash, like this one seem to be notable. Even though Graphic Smash itself only has an Alexa rank of over 700,000.  I see a parallel here with the afd for Metroblogging.  Metroblogging is a blog portal, and from there you can find blogs.  Metroblogging is a lot more popular than graphic smash, with an alexa rank of sub 30,000, it was rightly kept.  However, the links pointing to specific blogs were not.  Following a similar idea, I feel that this article ought to be deleted, with some summary information at the main Graphic Smash article.  The separate Graphic Smash comics however, should not have their own article. - Hahnchen 00:08, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * keep please wiki is not paper this article is fine Yuckfoo 21:53, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is definitely not notable. I just checked the Alexa rankings of two of my favorite web cartoons (Homestar Runner and Bonus Stage), and Homestar Runner came back with a 2,572 ranking and Bonus Stage with a ranking around 644,000. This is a definite delete. --WikiFanaticTalk Contribs 6:42, 2 October 2005 (CDT)


 * 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.