Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/White Ninja Comics (second nomination)


 * 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 08:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

White Ninja Comics

 * — (View AfD)

Comic doesn't meet the notability requirements in WP:WEB. The previous AFD in mid-2005 reached no consensus. Brad Beattie (talk) 01:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * This has been listed on WikiProject Webcomics/Deletion. Ronbo76 02:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Non-notable Web Comic. Evidently nothing has been found to establish notability since the last AfD. WJBscribe (WJB talk) 02:51, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable. --Meno25 07:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:WEB. MER-C 08:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. The "history" page on the official website says "Not only is there the audience of regular internet viewers, but many publications around the world have published White Ninja comics including, newspapers and magazines from San Diego, Montreal, New Zealand, Vancouver, Singapore, London, and Australia." However, I haven't found anything more specific yet. --KFP (talk | contribs) 10:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Cannot find reliable third party sources, WP:VERIFY & WP:CITE, to establish acceptable notability, WP:NOTE. It get's a lot of ghits, I've seen the White Ninja thousands of times on various websites, I'm even a little bit of a fan. But I can't find much to help White Ninja Comics to meet wikipedia guidelines. -- wtfunkymonkey 01:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 04:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Do not delete I hear this comic being discussed often and reffered often enough to consider it keep aworth--80.221.25.141 10:30, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Switch to a concern template due to claims of wide publication that have not been confirmed nor deleted, most likely due to lack of manpower as this is a nonprominent article. (I shouldn't be here myself. I've got studying to do.) As things stand, insufficient data. --Kizor 23:37, 11 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.