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 keep. MBisanz ^talk 14:18, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Ongoing Adventures of Rocket Llama[edit]

The Ongoing Adventures of Rocket Llama (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article is a very well done attempt to cover up the fact that this webcomic is lacking any notability by mentioning and sourcing a large number of unnotable events. The comic has not won an award and is not published in a notable publication. In fact, the webcomic has less than 200 unique visitors to its website on most days: Stats at Project Wonderful. Shishigami (talk) 11:33, 3 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. 1. Comic-Con is a seriously notable event. 2. The stats cited are not representative. They are the stats for a specific ad, not the stats for their whole site. Besides, RSS subscriptions and some viewers for reading webcomics don't even show the ads, so those users don't affect an ad's display count. 3. Comic-Con is NOTABLE. With 140,000 people attending it, it's worth mentioning twice. (You created a second account just to nominate this one article for deletion?[1] Seriously? That's odd.) MMMMMMMM (talk) 07:23, 4 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Neither of the mystery nominator's arguments hold up. Comic-Con is absolutely notable. Ad stats do not equal the comic's stats. For instance, my friends and I use a browser setting that won't let ads like that appear, therefore none of us would show up in such numbers. Shoester (talk) 21:24, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

ComicCon is certainly notable, but its notability is not rubbing off on the comics which are presented there by their creators. The facts remain that this webcomic is not published in any notable publication, that it has not won any notable award, that no articles about it have been written in notable publications and that the number of visitors to its website is very low. If this webcomic is notable enough for Wikipedia than several thousand other webcomics are as well. --Shishigami (talk) 22:48, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Notability is not established, and certainly is not inherited from Comic-Con. / edg ☺ ☭ 02:37, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. They're not just hawking their wares at these places. They're panelists at Comic-Con and WonderCon, so their convention involvement is no argument for deletion. Dr.Who (talk) 23:07, 8 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: are the cartoon llama and the cartoon cat panelists in real life? If yes, this does not seem possible. If no, to whom are you referring? / edg ☺ ☭ 00:31, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • The AfD nominator, who is the one who raised the issue of event notability as though only nonnotable events had been mentioned (and who claims on her or his user page to win unspecified awards for writing unspecified articles while criticising others re awards), subsequently remarked on what it had to do with the creators. Therefore, I referred to the creators. Dr.Who (talk) 05:35, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry, but delete. There's nothing in this article that indicates that this webcomic is notable according to our inclusion guidelines. Terraxos (talk) 00:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: No valid reason for deletion. Comic-Con International is a notable event and stats are misleading. Finally, I trying to WP:assume good faith, but I don't understand why nominator had to create an account just for this AfD.--Jmundo (talk) 04:14, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I am certainly open for arguments why the webcomic is notable, I believe that the reasoning of those who want to keep the article is erroneous since they suggest that the webcomic inherits the notability of Comic Con which does not make sense. The stats for the frontpage are also not misleading since they would be even low if the actual stats were 10 times higher which is totally unrealistic since only a minority of internet users switches off JavaScript. Alexa also shows that the number of visitors is low, the website has an "3 month average" Alexa rank of 1,227,016. --Shishigami (talk) 10:21, 9 January 2009 (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.