This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP — Gwalla | Talk 05:22, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Drowtales[edit]

non-notable, possible vanity page. 198.65.161.88 10:11, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comment: Given anons aren't allowed to vote in RfA's or RfD's, are they allowed to put them up? Shem^(talk) 00:19, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, they are allowed to put up VfD's even if their vote doesn't count (and it's not that they are not allowed to vote, it is rather that their vote might not be considered. See the guide for more information). --cesarb 01:24, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Redirect - Could also be "Make Impartial". I think this is a fair vote, and while some people have most certainly been vandalizing and behaving in a childish manner, it doesn't detract from the arguments that others are making. The page in question is of lower rank, and while it does have fans and interests, I don't believe it can be argued to be notable (note I am not suggesting it is necessarily non-notable either, just that notability is not an argument for preservation here). In addition, there is certainly questionable impartiality on this page that makes it borderline vanity, in my opinion. The whole thing takes place as a description of the fantasy world involved, without any noticeable distance or acknowledgment as such. Things such as comic history, controversies that may have arisen in the past, art style used, etc., seem more appropriate for wiki. A 'Comic Summary' (with an appropriate spoiler warning) should be a section, *not* the entire page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.198.147.195 (talk • contribs) 18:55, 16 Jun 2005

• Keep - I have difficulty taking this vote seriously. It's no less notable than anyting else in the Web_comics category. Needs more work to be sure, but not deletion. From what I can tell "198.65.161.88" is a vandal anyway, probably one of the same group that have been vandalising the article due to the "controversy" covered in the articles talk page. --Sherool 11:38, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comment. Question: does "nay" mean "keep" or "delete"? Please limit your votes to the two options (with "merge" and "redirect" and "cleanup" also acceptable choices), as "nay" could be seen as "negative - delete this" or "no, do not delete". jglc | t | c 16:19, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comment - Sorry, that means keep, I should have checked how these things work. Edited my first entry to say "keep". --Sherool 19:57, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Keep for me. This page has been the target of childish vandals all day yesterday. In fact, I think there's a specific need for a guide like this for this comic, since the official web site is so confusingly laid out. I also question the use of the word "vanity" when it's doubtful to have been written by the artist. --TouchGnome 12:03, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)

  User's fourth edit. --cesarb 16:56, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)'

That was my first entry, and I voted only once. Is there a prohibition against comments? I signed all of my comments. --TouchGnome 20:10, 2005 Jun 19 (UTC)

No, only that when there are suspicions of sockpuppetery (or someone asking on a forum for everyone to go and vote), comments from new voters and anonymous users don't count. I believe yours is legitimate; looking at your contributions, one can see quite easily that your account, while being new, was not made solely to stuff the ballot here. However, whether it will be counted or not depends on the admin who will close the discussion here. See the guide for more information. --cesarb 21:45, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

It's a shame my contributions to other articles aren't visible, as I was a helpful anonymous user before I created an account. But thanks for the relative vote of confidence, despite your "fourth edit" flag which still seems irrelevant. --TouchGnome 23:05, 2005 Jun 19 (UTC)

• Delete I'm not sure about the vanity accusation, but after an Alexa check revealed an Alexa rank of 135,056, it's definitely not notable. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:44, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)

Comment: Keep in mind the highly biased results Alexa give. Only people who use Internet Explorer under Windows and have the Alexa toolbar installed are counted. Acording to the sites own counter only about 67% of the users even use Internet Explorer, so Alexa will only give you a unknown fraction of the trafic generated by ~67% of the visitors to the site. --Sherool 22:18, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I know what you mean, but remember that the same applies to every site listed on Alexa. Alexa doesn't count the Firefox(etc.) hits of its #135,056-ranked site, but it also doesn't count the Firefox hits of its #135,055-ranked site, or its #1-ranked site, for that matter. The only way I could see this really making any difference is with sites which are specifically about other browsers. Spreadfirefox.com is probably ranked lower than it should be, for example. Even if we go ahead and assume that Drowtales is a full one-third behind where it should be, it would still only be just barely in the top 100,000... which still isn't really very high. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 12:46, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Comment: I can only comment on this, since I made a vote. I know I am not a member of wikipedia, heck I'll be called a "sock puppet". But on the argument of this Alexa, I move that it should not be considered part of validity because it's still only 67% at most, and not even everyone with IE use Alexa. Also, when comparing page results on "Drow" in general on google, Drowtales is still the second on the list to pop up on results. Now take into factor the international audience of the comic as well, and that Alexa is considered a minor search engine when comparing to Google, Yahoo, and even Altavista, though there seem to be a lot of biased for this search engine by some members here. Currently this is the first time I've ever heard of Alexa, and when asking others, only a few knew of it. As an associated webmaster, this comes as a surprise that if this were such a good traffic rating tool, that I never heard of it, in my humble opinion. So my argument on the Alexa results are their true validity to the argument. There are well more websites now then their are people in the world, and being in the top 100K doesn't really matter anymore, once again, in my humble opinion. As for who I am, I'm only a member of Drowtales, member name "Ravinous". That's just incase you are curious so I don't come off completely nameless. --66.82.9.17 16:58, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Keep -I'm sorry but this page was created by fans of the comic, and not the creator. There was vandalism and attacks on the website for the comic, and when they learned of wikipedia, moved their attacks here when they were blocked from the actual site. I'm sorry enough that they moved this childish act to here. 66.82.9.85 13:44, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  Real IP is 66.82.9.85; probably honest mistake hand-typing the signature. --cesarb 16:56, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  Yeah, sorry about that, I found the signature thing second post (Fixed). --66.82.9.63 13:45, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as per Andrew Lenahan above and also likely sockpuppets and AnonIP activity. jglc | t | c 16:19, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comment I suggest reviewing the history for the page before voting one way or the other, or making "sock-puppet" accusations. Additionally, Jason, it's clear from Sherool's comment "Needs more work to be sure, but not deletion." that he meant Keep. --TouchGnome 17:41, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)

Comment: All right. Fair enough. Still, as I'm rather unintelligent, it makes it easier to understand a 'keep' or 'delete' ;)

Also, my sockpuppet comment was on the wrong VfD entry; I meant to put it on either the one above or below (both of which have had a lot of disturbance thanks to Sockpuppets). jglc | t | c 19:18, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Comment After carefully reading the Wikipedia guidelines on these subjects, I present the following argument:
  • Wikipedia guidelines on vanity pages indicate that "Lack of fame is not the same as vanity." "The most significant problem with vanity pages is that they often discuss subjects that are not well-enough known for there to be multiple editors." Page history shows there are indeed multiple editors making useful contributions.
  • Finally, I see nothing in the Wikipedia candidates for deletion that point to this page being out of place here. Additionally, I notice that the nomination was made by someone without even having an account here. --TouchGnome 20:07, 2005 Jun 16 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable. -Sean Curtin 23:19, Jun 16, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep More notable that a lot of Wikipedia articles. It's not like it's occupying valuable space anyway. - 193.11.248.83 00:04, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment As one of the people who have worked on the page in question, I will abstain from voting, even though my vote wouldn't be taken as seriously since I'm not a logged user. However, according to the description of a vanity page, this is not one. The author of the web-comic has not been participating in the creation of the article as far as we know. The editors that I know of have been people who are not paid nor associated with the comic other than as fans. While I admit that there is some issue with professionalism, it is something that has been discussed and is being worked on, and any contrabutions are welcome. As the author has been spending his time trying to get a work space to try and get the comic running more professionally, I personally find it unlikely that he is using sock-puppets to create it. Lastly, in argument for the article, I have noted that in other votes a google count has been used for validity of an article. Therefore I submit that Drowtales has a Google count of 6,790. 64.136.26.228 04:10, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Edit:by way of identification (since there have been accusations of "sock puppets") I'm offering this link. Thats the best I can do, as even user-names can be faked. http://frost-indri.deviantart.com/ 64.136.26.228 04:04, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete: It's yet another webcomic. -- Bobdoe (Talk) 05:23, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete advertising for a non notable webcomic. JamesBurns 06:47, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• I like Vanity, keep it I say! Until I see strong evidence to draw this into disrepute it's just one anonymous persons word against anothers. Keep- 'Freezer 09:46, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)Freezer'

Account created today. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:48, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Comment No doubt; most of this article's (sincere) contributors seem to have always been anons, and they likely only registered accounts today in order to vote here (as Wikipedia policy requires). At least they've bothered to register, as opposed to the anonymous poster who put up this VfD. Shem^(talk) 10:54, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Keep Given the significantly less notable entries in Category:Web comics, and how long this particular comic appears to have been online, I see no reason it should be singled out for deletion. FYI, it appears as though the Drowtales artist was recently targeted by a group of disgruntled 4chan users, over not giving them free access to all of his/her work [1]. Given the edit history ([2]) of the user who submitted this VfD, I find it difficult to believe that this isn't just the "Wikipedia branch" of the 4chaners' attack on this artist. Contributers on this article, of which there are apparently several, have stated that they are not the artist. It's hardly a vanity page, and I resent anon users using Wikipedia as a staging ground for their conflicts elsewhere on the internet. Note comments from vandals and trolls including "Drowtales been asking for it. They need teh pwned." Shem^(talk) 10:46, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable webcomic. --cesarb 16:39, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.