Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Really Heavy Greatcoat (comics)


 * 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 was No consensus. Cbrown1023 talk 02:30, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The Really Heavy Greatcoat (comics)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This page was deleted on 31 Jan 07 via the PROD deletion process with the comment "NN-comic". That deletion was contested on 15 Feb at WP:DRV. The page was restored pending the conclusion of this discussion. This is a procedural nomination. I abstain. Rossami (talk) 23:29, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * delete NN-comic. I stand by my PROD Cornell Rockey 21:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * restore How can a comic that has been published in various publications for 20 years including an international be a 'NN-comic'. It has certainly had wider print exposure than, for example, the briliant but relatively young Beaver and Steve by James Turner which however has an even larger Wikipedia entry. Please reconsider. User:johnfreeman96 —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 14:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As both a reader and a comics seller and reviewer I would second John's opinion here - TRHG has a longer history than many recent webcomic entries to Wiki and is published in Comics International, one of the most respected journals in the comics industry. It is also accessible via the Down The Tubes website which is a frequently visited site by many in British comics (Joe Gordon, Forbidden Planet (bookstore). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ByronV2 (talk • contribs) 16:28, 19 Feb 2007 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 20:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletions.   ("Comic that is currently also published online" sounds webcomic-y enough to me... if it's wrong, please remove.) -- Sid 3050 22:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per publication by not only one independent distributor, but apparently 2-3. And I would tend towards calling this a print comic primarily. Balancer 02:03, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep please. The initial publication point of the Really Heavy Greatcoat is online (although the strips in Comics International are published in the magazine, first they are later archived on downthetubes). To add to the claim of noteworthy publication, the downthetubes site generates some 14,000 unique user hits on average per month. User:johnfreeman96 23 February 2007 —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 14:57, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I sruck out the user's vote. User already voted up above. --Iamunknown 20:39, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. No evidence of attempt to establish notablity (tagged since June), arguments justifying inclusion based upon existing articles are specious, no secondary sources. --Iamunknown 20:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The comic seems to be primarily a print comic. It's carried by non-trivial independent distributors Virtual Lancaster and the journal Comics International. --Kizor 13:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Information. Wikipedia's primary criterion for notability is whether the subject of an article has been the subject of non-trivial published works by multiple separate sources that are independent of that subject, which applies to all classes of subjects. TRHG has been independently published, in Comics International, syndicated US cartoonist Michael Jantze's The Norm, the UK comics anthology Paper Tiger. User:johnfreeman96 23 February 2007 15:18 26 February 2007

TRHG rocks! It's been around for 20 years and is well worth an entry in Wiki. It is well-known through it's distribution in Comics International and the downthetubes site, where the strip is usually found, is a prime refernce point for British comics creators. So I say keep it. RSheaf2001. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.43.184.2 (talk • contribs)
 * Comment: I just added a cite for The Norm. Can those who have other sources add them? This article has been tagged as needing references since last July! --Dragonfiend 01:26, 27 February 2007 (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.