Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Okashina Okashi
1) Being about the 10th most popular webcomic on a particular free webhosting site is rather trivial when you consider the tens of thousands which are not on that site.  If being number 10 on this website were that big of a deal then their would be plenty of reliable sources writing about this webcomic and the creator of this webcomic probably wouldn't have to write an article about themselves. 2) This is not flagged for  because the webcomic's author simply corrected some errors in the article. It is flagged for vanity because the webcomic's author created the article and has edited it heavily ever since. Check out the history http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Okashina_Okashi&limit=500&action=history which clearly shows the webcomic author creating the article and making about 60 edits to it, more than all other editors combined. Check out this diff http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Okashina_Okashi&diff=19071017&oldid=10948734 which shows the webcomics author making 14 consecutive edits to the article over the course of several months in which they add 20-some odd paragraphs of completely new content. This is the furthest possible thing from someone simply correcting mistakes in an article about themselves; this is the absolute definition of   where someone creates a lengthy encyclopedia article about themselves. 3) We don't have inclusion standards for web sites based on their traffic. If an extremely low traffic site has a huge impact on culture that is verifiable through reliable sources (it's written about in the New York Times and Wired Magazine, for example) then we might write an article about it. If a high traffic site is unverifiable through reliable sources, then we can't have an article, because we're building a reliable encyclopedia. 4) Simlar to your first point, being just outside the top 100 on a site that measures a fraction of all webcomics is rather meaningless and trivial. 5) This isn't up for deletion because it "isn't popular enough." it's up for deletion because it violates a large number of guidelines and official wikipedia polices, from Wikipedia:No original research to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view to Wikipedia:Verifiability and beyond.  Finally, are you the same "Kisai" that's listed as being one of the two "folks behind Comic Genesis"? http://www.comicgenesis.com/about.html If so, that would be a good thing to disclose in order to minimize any conflict of interest issues inherent in telling people how notable the webcomics hosted on your site are. If not, sorry for the mix-up
— User:Dragonfiend, 06:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:VANITY||WP:VANITY (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest)