Deletion of Web Cartoonists' Choice Awards (2nd nomination)

Comment: as far as I can tell the topic lacks "''significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject''" - which is the criterion for a stand alone article set out in the |general notability guideline. Most of the sources currently used in the article are unreliable ones such as ComixTalk and various blogs. Others are not independent - the website for the awards and press releases. What that leaves is the New York Times source mentioned in the nomination. Personally I think that there are instances where one source can be enough to sustain an article - but here I do not think this to be the case. The article in question is not about the awards - it is about webcomics in general - and does not even take an in depth look at the awards. One paragraph, comprised of five short sentences, is dedicated to discussing the actual awards. There is some further discussion about some of the winners but it is done in the context of webcomics as a whole and does not say anything about the awards. I do not think that this is enough to sustain an encyclopaedia article and given that the awards have not been held for two years I do not imagne that there is much independent, reliable coverage in the pipeline. Currently sources do not even exist to confirm if the awards have been cancelled or why so it is impossible for the article to give an accurate account of either the awards over their lifetime or their current state. There is a secondary issue that relates to this |AfD in that there are several - possibly even many - articles about individual webcomics whose sole claim of importance is having won one or more of these awards. Currently Wikipedia:Notability (web) gives as "''The website or content has won a well-known and independent award from either a publication or organization''" as a criterion for a stand alone article; whether "''well-known and independent''" is the same as |notable is - in my opinion - a discussion for a different venue. Each article should be judged on its own merits and based on the lack of coverage and the fact that an apparently defunct award for webcomics seems like an unlikely topic for significant coverage by |reliable sources in the near future I think this article should be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NN||WP:AFD||WP:NN||WP:RS)

Comment: I have added the |AfD header to the subarticles since they are also effectively up for deletion
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:AFD)

Comment: for what it's worth during Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Zaccar is a particular instance when the community decided that one New York Times article was not enough to confer |notability on a subject. In that case it was an entire article pretty much dedicated to the individual, not just a paragraph
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NN)