[WikiEN-l] Webcomics

Tue Oct 25 09:51:25 UTC 2005

Ok, so no one managed to give an idea of why one webcomic might be  
notable or not before
I could make [[Lentil]] not suck and be full of factual errors (still  
has a dodgy pic
but I ate all the lentils at home).

So here is the answer, having randomly clicked around the category.

Basically all the articles on individual webcomics are really bad  
articles. There
isnt really enough to say, just lists of characters, plots etc.  
Occasionally
there is a snippet of interesting information. They have no useful  
links to or
from them.

However the articles on the creators are generally really good, and  
this is what
should be concentrated on. Other stuff should be included unless it  
outgrows
the author.

In the same way that you can write a half decent short article about  
a minor
author (compare [[Beverley Nichols]] say), but you would never write an
article about any of his books (I keep trying to un redlink them). He
probably fails on any current notability criterion that you could  
measure,
as most of the books are out of print, but no one would suggest deletion
as there are links to other people and events at the time that add to  
WP.

Similarly I have spent ages trying to stop people writing articles about
individual beers, merging them into the brewery. There are very few  
beers
that an article can be written about. See [[Samuel Adams Utopias]]  
for what
happens when people try (usually when they get back from the pub).

But [[Able and Baker]], Snowspinners example doesnt even have an  
article on
the author. Its like I picked a single book by Beverly Nichols and wrote
that first, listing all the characters. I would expect it to be deleted
as non notable. But if I need to spin one out as the article has got too
long that would be fine.

Justinc