Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Single Asian Female

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. (non-admin closure) ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 07:15, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Single Asian Female

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Long-discontinued webcomic (it seems that it was taken down after two or three years), with only one 2006 AsianWeek article dedicated to it. Very little content can be found nowadays about this comic, besides Bad Webcomics and TVtropes commenting on its quality (or lack thereof) and offensiveness. Otherwise, there is no indication that it was ever notable or popular. The print magazine which published a few strips of it does not seem to be that notable either. IMHO, it fails WP:BK, WP:WEB and WP:GNG. Psychloppos (talk) 07:14, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Webcomics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 08:07, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

keep I'm seeing three sources in the article that write about the comic. Seems over the GNG bar. Hobit (talk) 13:39, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Hobit: actually, there's only two, or one if you consider that the Northwest Asian Weekly article has long been offline (no idea if it's even that notable as a source). The San Francisco Chronicle gave it only a passing mention. That leaves only the AsianWeek article. Psychloppos (talk) 14:51, 20 August 2021 (UTC) (Correction : actually, the AsianWeek article is also offline and archived)[reply]

Archived doesn't matter. And SFC has 6 paragraphs focused on the comic and author. I'm good with the three sources. Hobit (talk) 15:08, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think this one passes. There are some good sources there. The fact that the comic is "long discontinued", or that some of the sources now only live on Archive.org is irrelevant. Wikipedia is not an index of current websites. The sources on "AsianWeek.com" and the weirdly similarly named "Northwest Asian Weekly" are exactly the kind of sourcing you want for an article about a comic. ApLundell (talk) 16:09, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep -- this seems to pass GNG for better or for worse (perhaps the latter, since so much of its legacy seems to be based on how it wasn't very good). I am willing to change my opinion if offered a good argument either way. jp×g 09:06, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Due to GNG (Specifically the AsianWeek, San Francisco Chronicle, and Northwest Asian Weekly articles) WhisperToMe (talk) 19:05, 25 August 2021 (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.