Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Eddsworld (2nd nomination)

This comment copied from the talk page of the original deletion discussion (Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Eddsworld):

Hello. The reasons for the deletion of this article "so far" are that there are no sources and that the subject does not meet web notability. This subject is notable because it meets Wikipedia's Third Criteria for Web Notability, as subject-matter has been distributed by an independent "online publisher", "online broadcaster", and major news agencies and organizations (the BBC, TVE, and the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Conference) that are independent of the creators. There are many "trivial" distributions of the subject, but that fact does not subtract from the meeting of the the main criteria (which only one is required). I would like to point out that there are sources too, if they are incorrect or not valid then the assistance in getting some would be welcomed. If you could indicate what is wrong with the sources or which sources are invalid, then please assist or tell me. I see that it meets Web Notability, so the deletion of the article should not be an option. I think improving this article, rather than deleting it, would be more suitable (as I would not argue that there are problems with it).Zach Winkler (talk) 20:29, 2 April 2011 (UTC)

-- Kateshortforbob talk  22:20, 2 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank-you for the assistance Kate, it was extremely helpfull. I have removed some of the sources that were not proper, I also added a source from The Guardian (newspaper). I know this may not be enough, but I will continue to search for more proper references to prove its notability. Zach Winkler (talk) 23:28, 2 April 2011 (UTC)