Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Nell: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
adding DitWits article to deletion bundle |
→Jeremy Nell: k |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
I am also nominating this related article because it is of low quality, self authored and describes a non-noteworthy cartoon. |
I am also nominating this related article because it is of low quality, self authored and describes a non-noteworthy cartoon. |
||
:{{la|Ditwits}} [[User:Richard Catto|rrcatto]] ([[User talk:Richard Catto|talk]]) 23:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC) |
:{{la|Ditwits}} [[User:Richard Catto|rrcatto]] ([[User talk:Richard Catto|talk]]) 23:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''', notability demonstrated by sources. COI is not by itself a reason to delete; nor would be article quality, though this one looks fine (maybe a touch-up for PR tone). I personally would redirect [[Ditwits]] to Nell's own article, because in my (US) experience, editorial cartoons don't have separate notability or even generally titles, and in particular the article content is almost identical (across all three articles). I have no problem with a daily strip having separate notability, though. --[[User:Dhartung|Dhartung]] | [[User talk:Dhartung|Talk]] 04:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 04:24, 27 May 2008
- Jeremy Nell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Jeremy Nell is not noteworthy enough to have an article. Article was self-authored. rrcatto (talk) 21:31, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
I am also nominating the following related pages because the page serves merely as an advertisement for Jeremy Nell's non-noteworthy blog and it is also another self authored article:
rrcatto (talk) 21:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
I am also nominating this related article because it is of low quality, self authored and describes a non-noteworthy cartoon.
- Ditwits (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) rrcatto (talk) 23:46, 26 May 2008 (UTC)
- Keep, notability demonstrated by sources. COI is not by itself a reason to delete; nor would be article quality, though this one looks fine (maybe a touch-up for PR tone). I personally would redirect Ditwits to Nell's own article, because in my (US) experience, editorial cartoons don't have separate notability or even generally titles, and in particular the article content is almost identical (across all three articles). I have no problem with a daily strip having separate notability, though. --Dhartung | Talk 04:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC)