Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/God Nose

: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 keep. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:41, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

=[[God Nose]]=

:{{la|God Nose}} – (View AfDView log{{•}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/God_Nose Stats])

:({{Find sources|God Nose}})

Delete. Non-notable comic book per the essence of WP:BK. I had redirected it to the authors' page but the creator of this article reverted my edit. From the article: "A total of 1,000 copies were printed on a Xerox machine at the State Capital print shop after hours." -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 07:58, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Keep, clearly notable. It would be rather strange if the first underground comic had been published by DC Comics in 100,000 copies. It was, by the way, reprinted at least four times later on... This book clearly meets the "essence" of WP:BK, specifically points 1 (sources) and 3, "The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement."; being the first underground comic is quite a "significant contribution", and it is considered as such by sources like Heritage Auctions[http://comics.ha.com/c/item.zx?saleNo=826&lotNo=42140], where it sold for a quite impressive $6K, or [http://books.google.be/books?id=X1QGu16o0OoC&pg=PA206&lpg=PA206&dq=%22god+nose%22+jackson&source=bl&ots=FPx4ZE4Vbj&sig=SyJyx7roTFXc8w7eTkID95ZjwU4&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=ZSbsT5iTFpHn-gbc57HYBQ&ved=0CFMQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22god%20nose%22%20jackson&f=false this 2010 book], "Graven Images: Religion in Comic Books and Graphic Novels" which gives it a lot of attention. It also gets a long paragraph [http://books.google.be/books?id=dTN54Zv0Ip4C&pg=PA54&dq=%22god+nose%22+jackson&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=WSfsT8LuLceF-waahf3zBg&ved=0CDwQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=%22god%20nose%22%20jackson&f=false here], and further attention [http://books.google.be/books?id=tn9QAAAAMAAJ&q=%22god+nose%22+jackson&dq=%22god+nose%22+jackson&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=WSfsT8LuLceF-waahf3zBg&ved=0CEMQ6AEwAw here], [http://books.google.be/books?id=vAH24kOdCq8C&pg=PA204&dq=%22god+nose%22+jaxon&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=2SfsT4eeKc-h-Qbo9am-BQ&ved=0CE4Q6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=%22god%20nose%22%20jaxon&f=false here], [http://books.google.be/books?id=K2J7DpUItEMC&pg=PA649&dq=%22god+nose%22+jaxon&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=2SfsT4eeKc-h-Qbo9am-BQ&ved=0CGUQ6AEwCQ#v=onepage&q=%22god%20nose%22%20jaxon&f=false here] and [http://books.google.be/books?id=hQb_q6DWle4C&pg=PA167&dq=%22god+nose%22+jaxon&hl=nl&sa=X&ei=2SfsT4eeKc-h-Qbo9am-BQ&ved=0CEgQ6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=%22god%20nose%22%20jaxon&f=false here]. Need I go on? Clearly a notable comic, no problem to meet WP:BK at all. A merge to the author may be appropriate, but deletion is extreme overkill. Fram (talk) 09:48, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Speedy Keep per SK#2: "nominations that are clearly an attempt to end an editing dispute through deletion, where dispute resolution is a more appropriate course". Also, the topic is quite notable and the number of copies of the first edition is not a significant statistic. Warden (talk) 12:07, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:21, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Keep I think Fram has demonstrated that the article does meet the WP:BK notability guideline. Davewild (talk) 18:41, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

: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.