Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Kid radd

No opposition other than one anon IP and the comment from Yehudi.--Cato 22:59, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Kid radd
Non-notable web-comic; already deleted from Wikipedia on that basis (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kid Radd) — BD2412 T 15:08, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 16:00, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless evidence of notability is provided. ~ UDScott 15:25, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom & silly but lower case names (almost) always are worth a look! -- Herby talk thyme 20:30, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable--Cato 22:16, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I am not sure what you all mean about "non-notable". You just put that out onto the table without any real backup. (And not sure where the "lowercase" names come from, and surely "Radd" isn't as silly as "Black Mage")
 * Comment Deleting an article from Wikipedia is good but not conclusive evidence of non-notability. I think the R/r is a red herring.--Yehudi 13:23, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Yehudi is right on both points, of course. I'm sure Herby is just alluding to the tendency (that several of us here have surely noted before) that articles with miscapitalization tend to come from editors with little interest in learning what Wikiquote is about and whether their subject is appropriate by its guidelines. In this case, webcomics can achieve WQ notability, but rarely do. It's far too easy for someone to throw up a comic and promote it, attaining a Warholian flash of fame through blogs and discussion boards. What we typically look for in any creative work is citation, or at least discussion, in Wikimedia-reliable sources (e.g., established print media, websites with editorial boards, etc.). In this manner, Wikiquote has an informal version of w:WP:WEB, which is why editors here often consider a pro-deletion AfD on Wikipedia a strong suggestion for deletion here. In these cases, we usually expect some significant effort by article supporters to establish the subject's notability (not just assert it) in order to overcome the far-larger WP community's evaluation. It usually doesn't work, but it has on occasion. Each case is judged on the material presented in the article and in these VfD discussions. (In this case, it doesn't help that the article is written more like a blog posting than a WQ article.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:18, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Reluctant delete Borderline, but I think non-notable. Poetlister 16:42, 3 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per UDScott. I can't say it enough — citing references, especially quotations, in reliable sources goes a long way toward overcoming notability objections. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable enough to be at wikipedia, so it is probably not notable enough for here.--SJP 13:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)