Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elf Only Inn (3rd nomination)

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. Rx StrangeLove 06:41, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Elf Only Inn

This comes here as a result of undeletion on VfU. Note that it has been previously AfD'd twice: here (deleted) and here (no consensus) — there were some concerns on VfU about the closure of the 2nd. The earlier revisions (not the same as the present article) have been restored to provide participants here with the ability to study its expansion. Abstain.-Splash 03:47, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's a WCCA winner, that's good enough for me. Nifboy 04:22, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Looks like a perfectly fine article to me. Bryan 04:30, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, on reflection it occurs to me that this is a pretty bad nomination. The nominator doesn't give any reasons why the article should be deleted, and doesn't even vote that it should be deleted himself. What exactly is the problem with having an article about this? Bryan 15:53, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think I can address that one, with the caveat that I'm mostly responsible for current version of the EOI article. When the latest AfD came down I went back over the history. The first AfD resulted in a delete, and the second one, which came soon after the first, was inconclusive. There were some concerns on VfU that this article was undeleted without going through the proper channels. Some even wanted a speedy deletion because of that, but it wasn't undeleted, but recreated. The previous versions of the article were either stubs or scrapes of the EOI Web site, and IMHO deserved the kibosh. The current incarnation is based on something I wrote from scratch, with the history from the deleted versions restored. I think the idea was to decide the status of this article once and for all. Obviously, I believe it's worthy of inclusion, but I do agree it was worth bringing to the table one more time. -Adashiel 17:07, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. It's a webcomic -- a dead webcomic. Let it stay dead. --Calton | Talk 04:58, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- There aren't any more Peanuts strips being written either. Historical stuff most certainly belongs in Wikipedia. Bryan 15:53, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A WCCA winner and it was also invited to Keenspot. It went on hiatus soon after, but I fail to see the relevance in that. Adashiel 06:50, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable, good article, and Wikipedia's not paper.Vizjim 10:45, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Anyone who read the mess I made on the 2nd history of deletion knows my reasons. :) Saxon 11:44, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Pretty notable in the web comic scheme of things (which isn't to say that much, I realize). Deleted the first time, IMO, largely on the basis of the then-very-poor quality of the article, and is now perfectly fine. Alai 23:44, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I'd prefer Roflcopter over this. Grue 15:07, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Borderline for Wikipedia, IMHO on the wrong side of the border. Web Cartoonist's Choice Awards? Hmmm... There seem to be 26 of those handed out. In 2004, I see, it was not an Outstanding Comic winner. It was not an Outstanding Comic finalist. It was an Outstanding Story Concept winner... in a field of six. Sort of like saying "But it won an Academy Award" and finding out that it was for Makeup. People interested in deeper coverage of webcomics can find what they seek at comixpedia's wiki. Dpbsmith (talk) 23:40, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm sorry, are you saying that people who win Academy Awards for makeup aren't notable either?Snowspinner 14:33, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - No. I'm saying that calling it a "WCCA winner" without qualification is exaggerating whatever degree of notability that would imply. Dpbsmith (talk) 18:54, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, article is only on AfD becuase of VfU over old revisions in history (I should know, I started it). Alphax ^τεχ 09:35, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; I don't believe all (or most) webcomics should be on en-WP, but this 'un was popular and significant (tho' Lord only knows why). --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 11:13, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is getting silly. --Tony Sidaway ^Talk 11:57, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep - strip is on Keenspot, which is a for-profit webcomics syndicate. All Keenspot strips are notable. Snowspinner 14:33, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable, encyclopedic ➥the Epopt 22:48, 17 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: It's quite disappointing to see a listing like this - it was obvious that it was not going to be deleted, so why waste everyone's time by listing it yet again? Dan100 (Talk) 20:53, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: my understanding is that re-listing following an undeletion is part of the process. I found the article interesting and informative, prompting me to go and read the web-comic itself: this IMNSHO is precisely the point of having such articles. HTH HAND —Phil | Talk 11:29, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- What I want to know is where the VfU comes into play. I don't recall there being an instance where this was undeleted. Saxon 03:55, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - The article from the first AfD -- the one that was deleted -- was undeleted into the history of the current article (i.e., the recreation). I don't think the VfU procedure in that case requires an AfD, but it doesn't rule it out, either. -Abe Dashiell 04:21, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, web comic with no apparent claim to any kind of fame or importance. Everyking 20:02, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The article was remade after it's first deletion, survived a second round and will survive the 3rd here. It's not my favorite comic, but why do people want it deleted so bad? Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 21:40, 21 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Still not a notable webcomic. If the fact that it's on Keenspot is notable, make a mention of it in Keenspot. - A Man In Black (Talk | Contribs) 06:28, 22 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

.