The result was withdrawn - appears to be notable after all. The article is highly dependent on primary sources, which is bad, but this can be resolved through the editing process. JBsupreme (talk) 18:03, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, this is a non-notable webcomic which fails GNG. The limited coverage it does have is superficial, such as appearing in a long list of names in the Editor & Publisher journal, the remainder of coverage coming from blogs and the like. JBsupreme (talk) 22:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]