Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Air Force Blues

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 delete. Jayjg ^(talk) 04:55, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Air Force Blues

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Webcomic which fails WP:WEB - no significant coverage in multiple reliable independent sources. The one Army Times article doesn't seem enough to base the whole article on, and seeing as its published by his employer, it's probably not independent. Claritas § 17:00, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete – doesn't seem to be notable. ╟─Treasury Tag►voice vote─╢ 19:45, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Its a webcomic, not notable to have an article the same reason our webcomic may not be notable outside wikipedia--Lerdthenerd (talk) 19:48, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I've managed to bring the total number of sources up to three. Also note that the AirForceTimes is an independent civilian publication, which is most certainly not his employer. — C M B J 22:17, 8 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

United States Air Force certainly is his employer. Unless AirForceTimes is unaffiliated with the American air force, which I somehow doubt, it's not an independent publication. In any case, there's only one reliable independent source for the article, which falls short of WP:WEB. Claritas § 09:55, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the Air Force Times is operated by a for-profit civilian company that is in no way affiliated with the United States Air Force. This is evidenced by the assertions at the bottom of the page. Joint Task Force Bravo and Air Force Public Affairs Agency do share a common parent employer with the author of the webcomic, but they do not hold any stake in the webcomic itself, which was not created as part of official duty. — C M B J 10:30, 10 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is a significant lack of multiple independent and reliable sources who discuss this webcomic. While this is not the only criteria to establish notability, the others do also not apply. --84.57.164.11 (talk) 14:16, 9 July 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.