Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vinci & Arty

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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 of the debate was delete. – Sceptre (Talk) 08:30, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vinci & Arty

[edit]

Non notable webcomic, prod removed without comment. Alexa ranking is 472,344. Rory096 05:27, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-The article should not be deleted. It's just as good as other mentioned comics such as Penny Arcade, Sabrina Online, and VG Cats. Not to mention that the artists are active and host a weekly radio talk show. They put time and effort in to their work, and it deserves notification. ~ Wovstah

How good it is doesn't matter. What matters is how notable it is. --Rory096 05:41, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
-This comic does have a following and is updated regularly. I made this page of information with the consent of the authors. The fact it is also listed on the Furry Comics List makes it notable enough to stay. There is no excuse for marking it as a non notable comic when it IS notable. --Vidyaranya 05:42, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-I just told you why this comic is notable. The website is given, and on the website you can see that is regularly updated. Furthermore, the Livejournal Community 'cakepieces' shows that it has a good amount of viewers. Lastly, the fact they host their own radio show which, to my knowledge neither VG Cats, Sabrina Online, or PennyArcade do, shows notability. --[[User:Vidyaranya}Vidyaranya]] 05:52 5, April 2006 (UTC)

Just because a website is there and regularly updated doesn't mean it's notable, even if it has a radio show. How big is this following? Why is the Alexa ranking so low? By the way, you can sign posts with ~~~~ to produce your signature and timestamp. --Rory096 05:54, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-I am still new with the entire system of Wikipedia. I am not sure what is ment by the ranking. There is no definate way to say how big the following is, but judging the IRC chat, which is also held, it has a generous sized following. What does it matter, really, if its notable? A lot of entries on Wikipedia contain only one or two lines about things which are even less known than this comic. -- User:Vidyaranya

    • Delete per nom. The notability of a webcomic has nothing to do with how often it is updated, how hard the writers work at it, whether or not they host a self-referential webcast or whether the web page has a forum (don't they all?). It's how many people read it. With an Alexa rank in the 400,000s, the answer is "not damn many." Wikipedia has standards for notability that this comic doesn't meet, however much you like the comic yourself. RGTraynor 15:57, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, not convinced of notability as above. Fails WP:WEB -- Samir (the scope) 06:01, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

-Instead of just passing judgement, why don't you research yourselves to see how notable it is since you're not listening to me? 06:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)Vidyaranya

You're not sorry at all, so don't say so. I don't know how to clarify it to you, and further more I damn well know its notable and if you can't see that then you must be blind. You say its not notable, tell that to the hundreds of fans. Tell that in their face and they'll beg to differ. Wikipedia is about providing information, not being facist about it. Vidyaranya 06:17, 5 April 2006 (UTC)Vidyaranya[reply]

  • Delete. Notability not established. (Viyaranya: it is not personal. It's just that one of the standards by which we judge whether an article is worth having in the wikipedia is whether the subject is sufficiently notable. The best way to demonstrate this is that the subject, in this case this web-comic has been noticed elsewhere--especially in the main stream media or by lots and lots of other webpages.) Bucketsofg 06:22, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see Sabrina Online, PennyArcade, or VG Cats in mainstream media either. Vidyaranya 06:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

comment. Then propose them for deletion and I'll give it some thought. For now, the article at hand is V&A, and I fail to see that it is notable. Bucketsofg 06:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you guys are so adamant about Alexa, may I ask one thing. On Wikipedia's own entry for Alexa, it says:

Alexa themselves admit several sources of bias - for instance, sites with relatively low traffic will not be accurately ranked, nor sites with a disproportionate amount of users who use non-IE browsers; and subdomains are included in the main domain's rank/trend figures. [2]

How do you know it is being accurate in this particular case? Vidyaranya 18:05, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No tool is perfect. However, on average it does give a reasonable estimate for the majority of sites that have no particular reason to be visited predominantly by non-IE users. If you look at their graphs, then Jack has around 10 times the traffic of Vinci & Arty, as does Sabrina Online, while VG Cats is more like 100 times. I do not think that it is likely that the readers of these comics have statistically significant differences in browser use.
I noticed you edited Sabrina Online to include the AfD template, perhaps in response to Bucketsofg. I would suggest that you read the instructions, as that is not the only thing that you have to do in order to list it for deletion. Personally, given the above Alexa ranking, 50,000 google hits, and the fact that it's been running for so long, I think you are wasting your time by listing it, but you do have the right to do so. GreenReaper 18:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'd strongly recommend against it, though. User credibility is important in AfD debates, and opening oneself up to impressions of filing AfDs out of revenge or spite can do that credibility no good. RGTraynor 18:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I removed the incompleted AfD from the Sabrina Online article per WP:POINT. –Abe Dashiell (t/c) 20:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not even close in comparison to Penny Arcade (Do this strips authors host one of the largest video game charity's in history, or regularly engage in political activism?), nor VG cats which, like PennyArcade is published in print.Not notable in the slightest as noted by Alexa. What's with the onrush of pro-furrys demanding their articles are notable????? ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 19:08, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm. Not sure - there could be many reasons. Somewhat over-zealous use of the new prod template? New users coming here from WikiFur (now one of the larger non-Wikimedia wiki projects out there)? The ever-increasing rise of furry fandom itself? GreenReaper 20:58, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I must've missed that flood somewhere along the way...Tony Fox 01:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you really want to know why there's an increase in the fandom's demands its because the community has been heavily discriminated against. Even some of the material that is in Wikipedia about the community is negative and upsets people who are true to the fandom. Quite basically, a lot of people who are part of the fandom and have been persecuted for being so are fed up with it to the point they don't tolerate resistance. I still question Alexa since there is controversy about it. If you're going to get reliable statistics, then you should use a system that covers all broswers instead of just IE. Now, I don't about you guys, but when I first came here I was lead to believe Wikipedia was for the providing of information about everything. This entire notability issue, especially with an established comic which has been nominated, as GreenReaper point out--still it seems even that was ignored. But the fact there is a policy on notability denotes a form of elitism.

Now, I'm not attacking anyone by saying this, but is it right to only include things that thousands of people are aware of? What matters to most people is the fact an object is out there and there is information on it...not how notable something is. The level of notability does not change the fact it still exists. The purpose of an encylopedia is to provide truthful information regardless of how well known it something is. I'm sorry I ever believed in this place's credibility. I don't intend assisting the mainstream wikipedia section any longer due to this issue. From now on I'll stick to the WikiFur and make Fandom based pages on what is important and known to the fandom.

I heard how Wikipedia even gave WikiFur, at one time, trouble when it first started out. I've made this decision to fully support WikiFur's prominence to the benefit of WikiFur, not Wikipedia as a whole. Vidyaranya 00:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

    • "But is it right to only include things that thousands of people are aware of?" Pretty much, yes; that's what makes Wikipedia an encylopedia and not a blog or a bulletin board. I'm sorry you presumed Wikipedia was something other than it is, but I'm likewise sure you understand that (as with any online website, blog, project, whatever) it is far less likely that Wikipedia will change its rules and practices to accommodate your personal preferences than the reverse. I note, for instance, that WikiFur has its own set of policies and guidelines [1] to which I imagine I would be expected to conform on that site. RGTraynor 13:45, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as, unfortunately, not notable enough to keep. Wow. Vidyaranya, I was going to post on your talk page, but you indicated not to; please, understand that this is a process that ensures only truly notable and encyclopedic topics are part of Wikipedia. As much as I myself enjoy V&A, read it all the time and think its creators are great, if Wiki allowed it to remain with little in the way of notability - and as much as there is a large following, there's no way to gauge it and no indication of it in referrable sources - it would open the floodgates to all kinds of crap that I've watched being deleted lately. Don't take it personally that it's being considered here. (And as a furry, I'm fine with the efforts that other furries have given to keep the related articles NPOV, for the record.)Tony Fox 01:02, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete Despite the Ursa Major Award nomination, not notable enough (would have been a weak keep if I could find some evidence website received more visitors than various webcounters would indicate. MikeBriggs 20:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Vinci_%26_Arty&oldid=1138738492"