Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Alexander (comics)

:{{la|Patrick Alexander (comics)}} – (View AfDView log)

:({{Find sources|Patrick Alexander (comics)}})

An almost word for word recreation of a previously debated and subsequently deleted article. Taseriouslyta (talk) 14:20, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

• Keep [http://geek-news.mtv.com/2011/07/27/interview-patrick-alexander-and-david-chelsea-on-dark-horse-presents/ Interviewed on MTV][http://techland.time.com/2011/04/21/the-comic-book-club-dark-horse-presents-and-hate-annual/ Rates a mention on Time] along with the sources already present. I am also curious as to how the nominators first edit to wiki is an AFD? Darkness Shines (talk) 14:31, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

• Keep on the simple basis the nom is faulty, there hasn't been a previous AfD debate nor a prior deletion. tutterMouse (talk) 15:32, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
• Keep - per DarknessShines. Also, I find it interesting that a new editor can claim in his first edits that this is a duplicate of an article from years ago, making this nomination suspect, IMHO. MikeWazowski (talk) 15:40, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:41, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

• Keep as I have undertaken various edits on the article I have to question the nominators comments that it is a 'word for word' re-creation of a previous deleted article. The article is referenced with independent verifable sources. He is an australian artist that has had his work published in a major american comic book publication - no small feat - and as such in my book is notable. Dan arndt (talk) 01:15, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
• Strong Delete per nom. Obviousfakeaccount99 (talk) 03:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)— Obviousfakeaccount99 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• Keep Dan arndt has made this into a pretty decent article now. It's referenced and verifiable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MustardC (talk • contribs) 11:42, 1 February 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.