Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The black diamond effect


 * 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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 12:32, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

The black diamond effect

 * — (View AfD)

Early digital comic which appeared in 1991-1992 and 1998. It certainly seems obscure and fails WP:WEB. The creator of the comic is also the author of the article, never a good sign. Google results are very sparse, no reviews or descriptions or similar references. The artist/author he claims that the techiques he used broke new ground. Whether this is true and whether other artists were influenced by this comic I cannot say, but this would be the only thread on which to hang the existance of this article, I think. But if it is true, it seems to have left no evidence whatsoever on the web. (The comic is on-line here but requires a plugin.) Herostratus 06:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. No WP:CITE backing up any claim of WP:NOTABILITY. DMacks 08:31, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, non-notable comic. J I P  | Talk 11:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. MER-C 11:55, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Edison 15:09, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I have reviewed your dicussion, and exactly what more proof do you need? Prior to establishing the domainsite, my web existence was through an internet provider iSTAR in Toronto, Canada. ex. "istar.ca/~tbdeinc". Surely, "Non-notable comic," is not a strong point for deletion. I have kept my activity on marketing my comics to the minimum. But they ARE out there. In fact, my current run has been designed to help and spark education for brain injury children. Varify this by going to biaph.com. Phone/fax/email them for confirmation. Granted my comicbook doesn't have a large distribution, but I have produced techniques that were ground breaking for comics. The first issue had 3 press runs alone! Diamond Comic Distributors provided quotes of my book at the time. CSN ran an article on my first issue. The current issues are distributed to doctors, caregivers, lawyers and hosptals. What other publisher does what I do? Please consider my comic title for the Wikipedia. - 11:40 EST Toronto, January 9 2007
 * Why is none of that mentioned in the article? What we need is pretty straightforward: verifiable citations from reliable sources attesting to the notability of this comic. DMacks 20:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Additional, I have a federal registered trademark THE BLACK DIAMOND EFFECT in CANADA, USA and abroad. You can varify this by finding me in the Library of Congress. - 11:46 EST Toronto, January 9 2007
 * Delete Having a trademark, does nothing to establish notability. What is needed is sources, the CSN article would be a start, but most likely at least a couple more will be necessary. Daniel J. Leivick 20:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTABILITY --Mhking 21:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I am in the process of contacting all the places that have done an article on my book. I just need some time as it is, I am contacting all the people after the holidays and their schedules are tight. George P. Gatsis - 4:39 pm EST - 9 January 2007 
 * Additional re: techniques; comparing the artwork in The Black Diamond Effect, (line, resolution and style) against Batman Digital Justice and Shatter that came out around the same time and before, you will see a clear distance in the quality and techniques or lack of in the other books. Before and after all the digitally produced comics were noticably BITMAP'd and had not achieved the level of artwork manipulation which combined vector and bitmap artwork from page to page. BTW, still working on contacting the reviewers. GPG 7:40pm EST, 9 January 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tbdeinc2 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC).
 * This technique comparison is original research, if you want to include it, a reputable source must have published the information. Also why contact these reviewers before giving us their names and publishers, no reason to wait for them to respond.  Finally please review  conflict of interest as the creator of this work you are discouraged from editing the article concerning it or its deletion nomination pages, in my mind if a the creator is the only person arguing for notability it probably is not notable. Daniel J. Leivick 01:16, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * GPG is my abbreviation of George Peter Gatsis (tbdeinc2). As for the reviewers, I am trying to track them down, why I haven't given out their names, is because they have reviewed my books over 15 years ago. The hard copies are somewhere with all my boxed books, stashed away or quite possibly thrown in the garbage, not sure yet. Until I actually track down the people to their new employement positions (alot happens in over 15 years) I won't be able to link or provide proof. As it is one of the newspapers Toronto Computes, that reviewed my book -the first review too- has merged with another publication or was bought out, don't know. But I've made the calls and sent out emails, to everyone. So to review: I have a 17 year old federal trademark, i have ISSN publication number, I am listed in the Library of Congress as well as the Library and Archives Canada, and pretty soon will have contacted the reviewers of my book. Anything else in terms of proof? George Peter Gatsis 9:04 est, january 9, 2007
 * I think there may be a misunderstanding, I have zero doubt that this comic is real no proof is required, I do doubt it is notable and a couple of 15 year old book reviews from Canadian computer newspapers will do little to change my feelings on this. A list of reviews might help users determine whether or not this article is notable, if it is  not possible to link to them it is still worth giving out the information. Daniel J. Leivick 02:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 05:43, 10 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The Black Diamond Effect is not a webcomic, it is created/published by traditional/digtial means, printed and distributed. After which is made available online for immediate download. A webcomic is produced and distributed only on the web. I've made it a mission to stay away from the classicifaction of webcomic for 17 years. Correct me if I'm wrong. Sincerely, George Peter Gatsis 8:44am, 10 January - 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.107.86.20 (talk) 13:48, 10 January 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.