I've had at least a few thousand readers for at least three years now. In that time, I've noticed that there are distinct patterns of website traffic every year that roughly correspond to the time high school and college students are in school. That is to say, September through Mid December and Mid January through May tend to be high growth periods. Summer tends to bring stagnation, slow growth, or even traffic loss. The winter holidays bring a brief but steep traffic drop.

I'm giving out free pdf copies of my new book of OPTICAL ILLUSIONS.

Why optical illusions? Well, I wanted to show everyone that I'm capable of doing more than cheap gags. Webcartoonists in general need to move beyond their borders!

The powers of CHRIS JONES and ZACH WEINER have been combined into one comic to rule them all: Captain Excelsior.

Google just made payments free. I know a lot of you webcartoonists use PayPal.

Is anyone making the switch?

Although it isn't news anymore that self-righteous pricks enjoy removing useful information from Wikipedia, I thought [the discussion on Wikipedia on whether to delete the article for The Noob] was interesting for a few reasons.

First of all, one of the guys targeting her for deletion actually wrote articles on other webcomics, including such strips as Fetus-X, which (despite being universally recognized among cartoonists as Fine Art) definitely doesn't have anything like the readership of The Noob. [XEREXES: Although there is no question The Noob has a substantial readership it really isn't appropriate to compare it to Fetus-X since I have seen no evidence to confirm or deny the readership numbers for either comic.]

Second, if you scroll to the bottom, you'll see that Gianna is trying to debate him by offering a well-reasoned argument. Go check it out, read the stances and maybe offer some support.

[UPDATE from XEREXES: Within the span of a couple weeks about 3 or 4 people (hard to tell from the now closed discussion page but it appears to me that wikipedians Seraphimblade, Sandstein, Satori Son, and Dragonfiend actually voted for "deletion") deleted the entry for Comixpedia from the Wikipedia. This seems like a perfect example of how the current process makes it almost impossible for rational, well-informed debate to occur. Now I get to personally feel what everyone else subject to this ludicrous process has gone through. I'll be the first to admit the entry for Comixpedia sucked, but by their own standards, a more comprehensive entry for Comixpedia should qualify. It's just that the former entry didn't reflect any of that. It's incredibly easy for a wikipedian trying to delete things to say something's not notable. The wikipedia doesn't have to show that the entry doesn't reflect any of the given notability standards - that onus is on keeping it I guess. Worthless until proven notable, even if the Comixpedia entry has existed for 3+ years and countless other entries in the Wikipedia cite to the Wikipedia entry for Comixpedia or directly to a link on Comixpedia itself.

I plan to petition for undeletion, but I suppose I need to do the research to demonstrate notability. Any advice on petitioning for undeletion or helping me with evidence supporting Comixpedia's notability would be most welcome. If there are any experienced wikipedians willing to actively help me with this - That means you Kiba! :) please email me at xerexes AT comixpedia DOT com.]

On the positive side it appears that Girly's deletion was overturned and the entry for it is back in the Wikipedia. Some comments from the "Talk Page" for Girly at Wikipedia:

Dragonfiend...

There was a Deletion Review on this. The deletion was overturned. Let it go. --SuperHappy 19:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Expert undeletion

The AFD was clueless, an academic expert on comics has undeleted it as notable. It lives. - David Gerard 20:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank God. If this webcomic was not seen as notable enough for Wikipedia, I would have lost all faith in the project. There are way to many delete happy editors with their finger on the trigger.--Pyritefoolsgold 06:36, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad to see it back too. -- Ryuko 09:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

A pity I missed the fun. Glad to see this restored, since it's definitely notable. It's one of those "If you don't think this is notable, you aren't qualified to edit webcomic articles anymore" ones. :) Xuanwu 07:55, 12 November 2006 (UTC)