Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Applegeeks (2nd nomination)

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. Killiondude (talk) 06:06, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Applegeeks

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

Largely self-sourced article, and Google offers nothing more robust to in place of the original website. Guy (Help!) 00:01, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. L3X1 (distænt write) 00:25, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. L3X1 (distænt write) 00:25, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletion discussions. L3X1 (distænt write) 00:25, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this is the only secondary reliable source I could find discussing the topic at length: [1]. It's very good, but stands quite alone. This article: [2] uses Applegeeks as a launching pad to discuss another topic. Other than that, I can't find any independent, reliable sources covering the topic in significant detail. (As an aside, the !votes on that first nomination, yeesh, Old Wikipedia was awful.) Cjhard (talk) 02:39, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – There are too few sources on this topic. I added the IGN article linked by Cjhard to Johnny Wander, the second webcomic by Ananth Panagariya/Hirsch. It's technically possible to keep these two articles seperated, but it seems like a bad idea not to merge the two. The current article contains no independently and reliably sourced information and is almost entirely based on primary sources. ~Mable (chat) 08:03, 27 December 2017 (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.