Revision as of 19:46, 25 June 2007 editJJLatWiki (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,206 edits →[]: Delete← Previous edit | Revision as of 12:07, 27 June 2007 edit undoJzG (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers155,071 edits →[]: commentNext edit → | ||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
* I advocate '''keep'''; I created the article because I like RKB, and because I think it is significant as one of the few examples of car-free advocacy to actually get published in mainstream sources. The cartoonist also gained some press coverage due to a political campaign in respect of a transport proposal in Minnesota. The strip is in there because it's GFDL'd, if Avidor would GFDL a non self-referential strip (especially the rusty muffler oracle) we'd use that I guess. Avidor has, I think, left the building, and I created it not Avidor. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 20:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC) | * I advocate '''keep'''; I created the article because I like RKB, and because I think it is significant as one of the few examples of car-free advocacy to actually get published in mainstream sources. The cartoonist also gained some press coverage due to a political campaign in respect of a transport proposal in Minnesota. The strip is in there because it's GFDL'd, if Avidor would GFDL a non self-referential strip (especially the rusty muffler oracle) we'd use that I guess. Avidor has, I think, left the building, and I created it not Avidor. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 20:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
* '''Delete''' as fancruft. The lack of car-free advocacy in mainstream sources is not a reason to keep this - Misplaced Pages is ]. The reliable source cited here is Pulse, which is a self described "locally grown alternative newspaper" and I don't see references to other local press coverage in the article. Also, RKB has not appeared in Pulse (or anywhere else, as far as I can tell) for several years. A cartoon that appeared for a few years in a community newspaper but hasn't been active for several years is not notable. ] 15:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | * '''Delete''' as fancruft. The lack of car-free advocacy in mainstream sources is not a reason to keep this - Misplaced Pages is ]. The reliable source cited here is Pulse, which is a self described "locally grown alternative newspaper" and I don't see references to other local press coverage in the article. Also, RKB has not appeared in Pulse (or anywhere else, as far as I can tell) for several years. A cartoon that appeared for a few years in a community newspaper but hasn't been active for several years is not notable. ] 15:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | ||
:* Not that this has anything to do with your content dispute with Avidor, of course, and the fact that he drew a cartoon lambasting your favourite subject. <b>]</b> <small>(])</small> 12:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC) | |||
* '''Delete''' - The guidelines for notability specify "significant coverage" in sources that are "independent" of the subject. I don't think mere publication alone qualifies as "coverage", much less "significant". And I don't think the publisher qualifies as an "independent" source. It seems to me that the cartoonist is more notable than this cartoon. --] 19:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC) | * '''Delete''' - The guidelines for notability specify "significant coverage" in sources that are "independent" of the subject. I don't think mere publication alone qualifies as "coverage", much less "significant". And I don't think the publisher qualifies as an "independent" source. It seems to me that the cartoonist is more notable than this cartoon. --] 19:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:07, 27 June 2007
Roadkill Bill
- Roadkill Bill (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
I'm not sure this is notable. The main graphic in that page started showing up on talk pages after the Seigenthaler incident and I suspect this article was created after the fact to legitimize that image being uploaded. The cartoonist is also a member of Misplaced Pages, but was cautious to not create the page himself. I don't think it's anything sinister, but I doubt this article would exist if the cartoon wasn't posted around Misplaced Pages several months ago. Philwelch 03:59, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 08:52, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep-- was published in The Pulse, a well-known Twin Cities mag.Rhinoracer 11:28, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. That's one reliable source, if at all. We need multiple reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer • 18:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- Merge with article for The Pulse, if The Pulse is notable, otherwise delete. Artw 17:22, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- I advocate keep; I created the article because I like RKB, and because I think it is significant as one of the few examples of car-free advocacy to actually get published in mainstream sources. The cartoonist also gained some press coverage due to a political campaign in respect of a transport proposal in Minnesota. The strip is in there because it's GFDL'd, if Avidor would GFDL a non self-referential strip (especially the rusty muffler oracle) we'd use that I guess. Avidor has, I think, left the building, and I created it not Avidor. Guy (Help!) 20:47, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
- Delete as fancruft. The lack of car-free advocacy in mainstream sources is not a reason to keep this - Misplaced Pages is not a soap box. The reliable source cited here is Pulse, which is a self described "locally grown alternative newspaper" and I don't see references to other local press coverage in the article. Also, RKB has not appeared in Pulse (or anywhere else, as far as I can tell) for several years. A cartoon that appeared for a few years in a community newspaper but hasn't been active for several years is not notable. ATren 15:04, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
- Not that this has anything to do with your content dispute with Avidor, of course, and the fact that he drew a cartoon lambasting your favourite subject. Guy (Help!) 12:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - The guidelines for notability specify "significant coverage" in sources that are "independent" of the subject. I don't think mere publication alone qualifies as "coverage", much less "significant". And I don't think the publisher qualifies as an "independent" source. It seems to me that the cartoonist is more notable than this cartoon. --JJLatWiki 19:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)