- 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. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:23, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Doctor Fun (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Apparently non-notable webcomic. I can't find any much significant coverage of it in reliable sources; and merely being the (claimed) first comic on the web doesn't confer inherent notability. Robofish (talk) 01:21, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, I should have done a Google Books search: that does show that it's been mentioned in several books, but I'm unsure of if the coverage is significant enough to make it notable. I won't withdraw this right away, because I want to see what others think. Robofish (talk) 01:27, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep As an editor who generally finds Wikipedia's webcomics coverage excessive for a general interest encyclopedia, I often find myself coming down on the delete side of webcomics-related AFD debates. That said, though, I think being the first webcomic of all is pretty damn notable. If that can be attributed to reliable sourcing, and other substantial coverage in reliable sources can be found to expand the article, I think notability is unquestionable in this case. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:09, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- While still not seeing very strong soucing, I'm convinced that this has a reasonable claim to the title of first webcomic, and thus have changed my comment to full keep. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 15:09, 14 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:10, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep First, This is not the first webcomic, and I've added a reputable source that says this is not the first webcomic. The author of this webcomic himself has told a newspaper that this was not the first webcomic. If anyone ever sees another unsourced wild claim like this in a wikipedia article please verify it with a reliable source or remove it. Second, I've also added 2 other sources and a template saying "This article needs additional citations for verification." I believe we can probably find more sources and improve this article. And third, I think we need to keep the corrected version of this article to help undo the damage of having this factually incorrect article for almost six years. Thanks, Starblueheather (talk) 16:32, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep It has a place in the early history of web comics, but Starblueheather is right in that it needs more and better citations. -- Kaszeta (talk) 00:55, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep; though Where the Buffalo Roam predated Doctor Fun as a comic on the Internet, the author of Where the Buffalo Roam emself admits that "Alas, we cannot claim the title of "first Web comic" -- that distinction belongs to "Dr. Fun".". So it is almost certainly the first comic on the web. 91.105.125.91 (talk) 15:01, 13 June 2010 (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.