Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Outer Circle


 * 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 Deletion review nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Delete — the vote fell 6:4 delete, but I note that 3 of those voting keep were unsigned anons. Whereas I believe that anyone can vote here, I also believe that this process is about community consensus, and that such unsigned votes, while noted, do not express any wish to collaborate on building Wikipedia. --Gareth Hughes 21:51, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

The Outer Circle
Non notable comic, found here. Article does not mention any sort of notability apart from existing. A google search for its creator "Steve Napierski" gives just over 40 links. A google search for "The Outer Circle" webcomic, gives 60 links. Please, webcomics should assert their own notability, other than passing the stupidly lax proposed guidelines at WP:COMIC - Hahnchen 17:06, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable - at least not yet. -DDerby- (talk) 04:00, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable, see User:SCZenz/Webcomics. But there's no need to use insulting language, even for criteria you disagree with, Hahnchen! -- SCZenz 15:57, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable-Dakota 16:18, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete Maybe not notable for its fanbase, but the comic itself is notable for being well written and well drawn. Steve Napierski is an excellent webcomic creator, and this entry deserves to be here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.197.54.142 (talk • contribs) 16:23, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete Since I actually do the comic, I doubt I would ask for it to be deleted. Here's a few of my points for it not to be deleted... Granted, "The Outer Circle" is not as large as Penny Arcade or PvP, the comic does update daily and has over 225 comics in it's archives.  The comic has been reviewed by Digital Strips and Steve Napierski/I actively work on The Webcomic List.  Also, "The Outer Circle" does rank under Alexa traffic details. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.180.38.20 (talk • contribs) 19:22, 18 October 2005  (UTC)
 * Don't Delete Mozan-True, the comic hasn't been around very long, but that doesn't mean it does not deserve recognition. If a great man were to rise to power very quickly, would he not be celebrated?And if a great comic were to rise to fame, would IT not be celebrated? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.170.172 (talk • contribs) 22:39, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't Delete No harm in having it. As for the google search...how common a last name is Napierski anyway? And how common is it to be paired with "Steve"? Adding quotes doesn't help any. - Donny
 * A Collective Reply - It doesn't matter how well written or well drawn a comic is. There are many well written blogs out there, many well drawn personal art sites out there, that is not an instant assertion of notability.  Just because a comic has x00 strips, also does not make it notable, a long running ignored website is the same as a new ignored website.  It fails the Alexa ranking test, but I've not even been using them for a while, because barely mentioning it as circumstantial evidence leads a a horde of straw man arguments claiming Alexa is the only grounds.  If a great man were to rise to power very quickly, he would have an article.  Has the outer circle had a great rise to fame?  I don't think so.  And the whole point is, that "Steve Napierski" is a relatively unique name is where Google can help.  If his name were John Doe, then the search would be absolutely useless.  And to reply to the post on the author's site, no, I am not against webcomics being listed on Wikipedia, I am however, against every webcomic entity listed on the encyclopedia just because their fans think it deserves one. - Hahnchen 13:37, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ...and thus the Hahnchen did prowl the Wiki, looking for unworthy webcomics to delete, never giving a thought that he has too much free time on his hands mayhap. -Donny
 * Hahnchen is trying to maintain consistency of our standards for notable vs. non-notable websites in our encyclopedia. He has an area of focus, yes, but it's work somebody has to do.  Your objections indicate that you don't really understand the purpose of Wikipedia, which means you might want to think twice before claiming experienced editors are wrongly nominating articles for deletion.  In my vote above, I put a link to my thoughts on this issue that may help you understand what's going on, if you're interested. (Also, you might want to be aware that linking to your own commercial website in an AfD could be considered advertizing, although I imagine you're just using it for identification purposes.) -- SCZenz 23:17, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I suppose what I said was un-called for. Almost as uncalled for as implying that someone's Wiki entry is stupid. The problem with a webcomics area is that it comes down to a matter of opinion of what is and isn't notable. Is it hits? Money made? Popularity? Granted, it could be argued that the latter crieria goes hand in hand with hits but there are plenty of lousy sites that rake in tons of traffic. Likewise there are quality sites that haven't yet made it big. The outer circle is one of those sites, yet it IS on people's radars. Waiting until its at Penny Arcade's level of noteriety before its included is just wrong. - Donny
 * I have a list of reasons a webcomic might be notable at User:SCZenz/Webcomics. We should use any verifiable evidence of notability--but "on peoples' radars" is a little vague, as that goes.  We need things that are quantifiable precisely because Wikipedia editors aren't qualified to judge the quality of webcomics!
 * The webcomic community seems to misunderstand what the Wikipedia community is about. We're now being insulted on webcomics' daily news, people are voting in AfD's without reading any of the relevant procedures, and webcomic-lovers are feeling hurt when we say that their website is non-encyclopediaic.  When we say "non-notable" we don't mean that it's not notable for a webcomic; we mean that it isn't visible enough in other sources to be put in an encyclopedia.  Wikipedia is not the place for webcomics (even high-quality ones that are underregarded on other pages) to increase their visibility.  -- SCZenz 00:31, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't think Hahnchen said that "someone's Wiki entry is stupid," at least not anywhere I've seen--he said a set of proposed guidelines were "stupidly lax," and you'll see above that I objected immediately. Please bear in mind, too, that a wikipedia article on a person, website, or anything else isn't that person's entry; it's the encyclopedia's entry about that person.  (Maybe that's just a comment on imprecise wording, but it is and important idea.) -- SCZenz 01:01, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - Thanks for that Donny, yet more character assassination from the lovable webcomic community. I just feel that webcomics should have some verifiable assertion of notability.  Merely being on people's radar is just not a real point.  The thing with webcomics, is that even the smallest have a core group of vocal loyal online fans, but just because of this it doesn't mean it's any more notable than any other website.  The same is true for forums, websites and blogs.  It's not that the Wiki entry is stupid, but I believe that wiki should not just be used as a collection of all information about anything that has ever existed.  And the reaction from some parts of the webcomic community is quite frankly, ridiculous.  Some seem to think that their webcomic inherently deserves a wikipedia article, just because it exists and Megatokyo has one.  And that without a wikipedia article, it makes their comic look small, bad, and not as good as Triangle and Robert. - Hahnchen 15:16, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete not notable, as per nom. Also, someone pointed to the site's Alexa rank as a reasoning behind their "don't delete" vote -- without mentioning that the Alexa rank is 654,834. Dragonfiend 05:20, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable. --Aquillion 20:13, 20 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.