Web Cartoonists' Choice Awards

[xkcd]

I just saw that a couple weeks ago, the Web Cartoonists' Choice Awards nominations for this year were announced. I remember these from last year because I discovered a few interesting comics I hadn't seen before.

I am sad to report that xkcd recieved no nominations in any categories. Let's work toward next year, though! We'll show them, we'll show them all, etc.

I'm not too up on the webcomics scene, to be honest. I read them quite a bit but there's a huge pool of comics I've never really read, including some of the big names like Megatokyo, PvP, Ctrl-Alt-Delete, and Scary Go Round.

Looking down the list, I see that Achewood got four nominations including outstanding comic. I've always had the impression Achewood was a comic FOR comic creators. Onstad has a sense of style that's very hard to define or replicate.
Copper got three nominations, as it should. Every time I read one of those strips, I feel inspired to draw grand, sweeping, dreamlike vistas, and then I throw them away because I don't have his artistic ability.

Toothpaste for Dinner got its first-ever nomination.

Dinosaur Comics got three nominations. Last year it won "best anthropomorphic comic". Which reminds me, I need to pick up his books.

Questionable Content continues to be nominated, of course. Although it didn't get "best slice-of-life comic", interestingly. Perhaps this was because of that deathbot thingy that appeared recently :)

I'm gonna see if I can register and vote. That would be pretty neat!

[CactusEater]

i found xkcd from a firefox plugin known as "Stumbleupon"

been hooked ever since, its really good.

my favourite comic is the one with the man on the dinosaur and he says "Before you speak to me i should warn you im a little strange" that always makes me luagh.

i also like "I love you" "i love you more" "yeah"

great stuff.

[twenty10]

stumbleupon rocks =]

(so does ctrl-alt-del, redmeat, and white ninja)

[Shoofle]

Fraternizing with the enemy is strictly prohibited. This is actually fine for you because xkcd might not have any enemies. Except for those in non-compliance with the rules.

[Tropylium]

This opinion will probably be of little fuss here, but I noticed that review sites are really starting to show their influence. Seriously, comics like junkRIOT would've had zero chance of even appearing otherwise, and I dout Gunnerkrigg Court could have been nominated for anything except perhaps "Outstanding Newcomer" either.

…So did you see the ceremony yet? OK, there was loads of that same ol' "straightguy banters while loonyguy shows up drunk / attempts to steal the award himself / otherwise humiliates himself" excrement, but I have to say, the ceremonies for Drama & Slice-Of-Life were pretty amusing, as were the halftime & closing shows. New Character Design & Web Design were creativ in a good way, too, altho they didn't provoke much more than a raised eyebrow…

(And by the by, if you saw a fave comic of yours that's on hiatus declared dead, that's kinda partially my fault … T Campbell was asking at Comixpedia for webcomics that had passed away during 2005. I gave two lists, one of officially dead comics, the other for ones that just went on indeterminate hiatus; he ended up just putting them all in there.)

[xkcd]

I didn't see the ceremony -- I guess it's online? I'll look for it in a bit. I haven't really followed them, beyond voting.

Speaking of Comixpedia, as much as I know I shouldn't, I can't help wondering when xkcd will get a Wikipedia article. At one point I was trying to make an automated list of webcomics ordered by Alexa rank (bad data, but the best available). I couldn't help but notice that the vast, vast majority of webcomics on the Wikipedia list of webcomics have ridiculously low or nonexistant Alexa ranks, one of the measures of notability they mention. And not to toot my webcomic's horn, whatever that means, but xkcd's been featured on numerous websites (a couple mentioned on the Comixpedia entry) and has a readership quite a bit bigger than the vast majority of the comics on that list.

Of course, I'm not gonna go create an article, and I'm not encouraging anyone here to. Wikipedia is not a platform for self-promotion. But it'll be neat when it finally gets up there, and in the meantime I'll try not to grumble too much about the arbitrariness of inclusion on the list.

[davean]

I didn't see the ceremony -- I guess it's online? I'll look for it in a bit. I haven't really followed them, beyond voting.

Speaking of Comixpedia, as much as I know I shouldn't, I can't help wondering when xkcd will get a Wikipedia article. At one point I was trying to make an automated list of webcomics ordered by Alexa rank (bad data, but the best available). I couldn't help but notice that the vast, vast majority of webcomics on the Wikipedia list of webcomics have ridiculously low or nonexistant Alexa ranks, one of the measures of notability they mention. And not to toot my webcomic's horn, whatever that means, but xkcd's been featured on numerous websites (a couple mentioned on the Comixpedia entry) and has a readership quite a bit bigger than the vast majority of the comics on that list.

Of course, I'm not gonna go create an article, and I'm not encouraging anyone here to. Wikipedia is not a platform for self-promotion. But it'll be neat when it finally gets up there, and in the meantime I'll try not to grumble too much about the arbitrariness of inclusion on the list.

I was going for never as I've started taking wikipedia's entire missing of large subjects like most of higher mathematics as common place and standard. If they start having what I am looking for, I'll be confused.

[Tropylium]

The reason that whether there will be a wikipedia article about xkcd hinges more on your visibility in the "main" webcomics community rather than the size of your actual readership.

I do promise that you are on my list of "webcomics to plug when I finally get off my ass and start that webcomic critiq site" (probably not in the top 10, but there nevertheless), but a faster way to get extra publicity might be to use comixpedia's own wiki (which seems to be down at the moment, however.)

[xkcd]

The reason that whether there will be a wikipedia article about xkcd hinges more on your visibility in the "main" webcomics community rather than the size of your actual readership.

Oh, I was just lamenting the fact that most of those comics linked on Wikipedia's list of webcomics are things that no one -- judging from Google and Alexa -- has ever heard of, pretty much vanity pages. And if they're not gonna apply their standards, I want in :)

[A] faster way to get extra publicity . . .

This isn't really scheming over getting publicity; it's not what Wikipedia is for, and I get a lot more publicity through other measures -- mostly, it'd be people who knew the comic checking out the article. I just think it would be neat.

. . . might be to use comixpedia's own wiki (which seems to be down at the moment, however.

I have a Comixpedia article, yeah. I don't get a lot of traffic through it, it's not very highly linked. I'm just thinking it would be neat to have a few more pages that came up when you googled 'xkcd' that weren't the 10,000 blog posts saying "check out this webcomic it iz hot", and actually gave you some more context for the comic.

I do promise that you are on my list of "webcomics to plug when I finally get off my ass and start that webcomic critiq site" (probably not in the top 10, but there nevertheless)

Thanks! It will definitely go on the list of places I'm proud to be mentioned! Not in the top 10, but there nevertheless.

[Tropylium]

The reason that whether there will be a wikipedia article about xkcd hinges more on your visibility in the "main" webcomics community rather than the size of your actual readership.

Oh, I was just lamenting the fact that most of those comics linked on Wikipedia's list of webcomics are things that no one -- judging from Google and Alexa -- has ever heard of, pretty much vanity pages. And if they're not gonna apply their standards, I want in

I haven't checked lately, but I thought the capital-V vanity pages get deleted relativly quickly. Hm, as a random selection… let's look at the letter L:

Landis
— On Keenspot & still activ. Good enuff for me.
The Last Days of FOXHOUND
— Hm, a bit obscure I think, but not too obscure to be a definit "don't put on WP"
Least I Could Do
— Big on voting lists.
Leisure Town
— I think I've only seen this once before. Apparently one of those avant garde hits that nobody reads but a few elitists praise.
A Lesson Is Learned But The Damage Is Irreversible
— Got 3 WCCAs this year.
Lethargic Lad
— Never herd of this.
Life of Wily
— Of medium importance in sprite comics' history.
Life on Forbez
— One of the more popular and famous strips on CG.
L'il Mell and Sergio
— On Girmalatic. And has Shaenon Garrity.
Little Dee
— Has ended up syndicated.
Little Gamers
— Fiercely popular.
Living in Greytown
— On Blank Label Comics.
Lizard!
— Was on Keenspot. That alone might not be sufficient to warrent an article, however.
Look What I Brought Home!
— Same as abov.
Lore Brand Comics
— By Lore of Brunching Shuttlecocks fame.
Loserz
— Big on voting lists.
The Lounge
— The most read strip on CG. (Yet surprizingly obscure.)
Lowroad75
— Big on voting lists.
Loxie & Zoot
— Infamous in the nudism community.
Lucy Lastique
— Never herd of.

I find 6 of the 21 obscure. Not too bad, since I do not claim to kno' everything about webcomics. I also can't think of anything that ought to be there, but isn't. Perhaps Lean On Me (the 2nd most famous transsexuality-themed webcomic), but I don't think its absense leaves any gaping hole.

I'm just thinking it would be neat to have a few more pages that came up when you googled 'xkcd' that weren't the 10,000 blog posts saying "check out this webcomic it iz hot", and actually gave you some more context for the comic.

Makes sense, altho it doesn't really take all that much time to actually check it out yourself instead.

I do promise that you are on my list of "webcomics to plug when I finally get off my ass and start that webcomic critiq site" (probably not in the top 10, but there nevertheless)

Thanks! It will definitely go on the list of places I'm proud to be mentioned! Not in the top 10, but there nevertheless.

[Shoofle]

(the 2nd most famous transsexuality-themed webcomic)

That is an... Interesting way to describe it! I'm not entirely sure, though, that being the second most famous transsexuality-themed webcomic makes you that famous.

[xkcd]

Welcome to "the robot is being worked on, so I'm writing essays on webcomics at work while waiting for it to come back online".

I haven't checked lately, but I thought the capital-V vanity pages get deleted relativly quickly. Hm, as a random selection… let's look at the letter L:

. . . on Keenspot and active is good enough for me . . .

The criteria for notable websites, discussed some in the talk page, are that the webcomic not just be "On Keenspot and active" -- it has to be notable. Published elsewhere. Widely recognized. When I went through the list cataloguing comics by Alexa rank, I didn't see a whole lot of Keenspot, but I was startled by the huge number of comics with an Alexa rank way down in the hundred thousands or millions ("Alexa rank of below than 100,000 or 250,000" was mentioned as a possible disqualifier, problematic because it made it hard to evaluate Keenspot comics).

See some discussion here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:List_of_webcomics#list_concerns

Notably, the writer thinks that most Keenspot comics don't merit encyclopedia articles, and mentions some way of judging popularity. The notability criteria for websites mention that it's notable if it's "distributed via a site which is both well known and independent of the creators, either through an online newspaper or magazine, an online publisher, or an online broadcaster." But I'm not sure if collectives like Keenspot qualify, especially when they get really big. They might, but it would lead to a lot of Wikipedia articles about comics very few people have read.

I found it interesting that there are about 20 comics with an Alexa rank above the total for Keenspot itself. Hate to look at bad Alexa data so much, but it's the only game in town.

Here's my list of the top comics by Alexa rank, as of a couple weeks ago:

1. Penny Arcade
2. Ctrl+Alt+Del
3. PvP
4. User Friendly
5. VG Cats
6. Questionable Content
7. Megatokyo
8. Sluggy Freelance
9. Least I Could Do
10. 8-Bit Theater

I only covered about a third of the list while building my stats, but very rarely did I find a comic I hadn't heard of that made it near the top 10, so I think that's a reasonably good estimate. Below the top 50 or so (of which xkcd is probably one), there are still another 50+ webcomics with a traffic rank above 250,000, and a good chunk of the comics on that list fall far below THEM.

Of course, traffic alone can't be a disqualifier for Wikipedia inclusion, but it gives some hints when you're not sure what else to go on. They speicifically mention in the discussion that a comic that has around 500 readers isn't really notable, and ditto for a comic being a patron to a small community. I think a lot of the comics on that list don't really get much past that. Compare to something like Dinosaur Comics's or Toothpaste for Dinner's tens of thousands of regular readers, hundreds of thousands of uniques a month, Alexa ranks of 20k-10k, LJ feeds with over a thousand subscribers, etc. And those two aren't even in the top 10. For comparison, xkcd has somewhere between 10,000 and 30,000 regular readers, about 750 LJ subscribers, and an Alexa rank of about 40k (probably going up now with the recent Boingboinging/JWZ-ing). But yeah, influence and impact is a big part of it, which is hard for me to judge for comics I'm not too familiar with.

I'm just thinking it would be neat to have a few more pages that came up when you googled 'xkcd' that weren't the 10,000 blog posts saying "check out this webcomic it iz hot", and actually gave you some more context for the comic.

[Using Wikipedia to check comics out] Makes sense, altho it doesn't really take all that much time to actually check it out yourself instead.

Well, I mean aside from the site itself. Wikipedia articles are nice for getting context, finding out if there's anything big you're missing, and generally just getting a perspective. Plus, you learn trivia the author didn't intend to put on their own site. I know I like reading Wikipedia articles about comics/things I know about/read regularly. And a lot of the time people are bad about making assumptions about what you're gonna understand or what will seem obvious or understandable about a site/project, just 'cause they're so familiar with it, and checking out the site itself doesn't always give you a good feel for what it's all about.

[Guest]

Don't go by alexa rank, it skews to the lowest common denominator. (It only ranks websites that people visit if they install the Alexa Toolbar... and it takes a moron to install some arbitrary TOOLBAR on their browser.)

Measure your actual traffic and compare it to others (if you can ever get anyone to tell you how much traffic they get, most of them hide it because it's a pitiful amount.)

Dinosaur Comics gets about 50k uniques per month. Diesel Sweeties and White Ninja Comics get almost the same amount on average (and you can check their alexa rankings vs your own and vs each other!)

[xkcd]

Don't go by alexa rank, it skews to the lowest common denominator. (It only ranks websites that people visit if they install the Alexa Toolbar... and it takes a moron to install some arbitrary TOOLBAR on their browser.)

It uses some other sources, too. It's not great data, but for arbitrary comparisons it's all we've got to go on. If you compare things that generally appeal to the same demographic, that should help.

Measure your actual traffic and compare it to others (if you can ever get anyone to tell you how much traffic they get, most of them hide it because it's a pitiful amount.)

Dinosaur Comics gets about 50k uniques per month. Diesel Sweeties and White Ninja Comics get almost the same amount on average (and you can check their alexa rankings vs your own and vs each other!)

I am pretty sure DC gets more than that these days. I'm also well above 50k uniques as of the past few weeks. Of course I use real numbers where I can and Alexa numbers where I can't. You do what you can with what you have and get something that's maybe right.

[davean]

I'm also well above 50k uniques as of the past few weeks.

Been months since it was under 40k and almsot to 100k now.

It would be great if people actually posted this data, boingboing does for example, but almost no one will. Sort of sad really.

[Tropylium]

I'm also well above 50k uniques as of the past few weeks.

Been months since it was under 40k and almsot to 100k now.

It would be great if people actually posted this data, boingboing does for example, but almost no one will. Sort of sad really.

Seconded. I've seen maybe two webcomic authors openly tell how much traffic they get, and that's including you. Googling for "webcomic traffic" gives a few more notes I've missed or which are someplace I don't read:
*SMBC claims to have about 10k hits per day
*PartiallyClips approximates that 3GB ≈ 120k visitors

Also, comic tracker sites like The Webcomics List could make slightly better traffic-rankers than Alexa. xkcd gets there currently about 125 views / month; something big, say, Questionable Content, 5800. There's still issues to watch out for, like ratings falling due to a comic not beïng tracked properly, or rising due to a comic advertizing on-site. Still, this givs at least hints.

Also remember that the traffic order (but not magnitude) of ComicGenesis is freely available.

Maybe I should just take a statistics course or three and just become The Webcomic Survey Guy…

[xkcd]

Seconded. I've seen maybe two webcomic authors openly tell how much traffic they get, and that's including you. Googling for "webcomic traffic" gives a few more notes I've missed or which are someplace I don't read:
*SMBC claims to have about 10k hits per day
*PartiallyClips approximates that 3GB ≈ 120k visitors

From talking to other webcomic writers, I hear more about stats and associated rumors of stats, but unless they put it up it's not really my place to share. Also, note that while in the early days of the web 'hits' was synonymous with 'visits', nowadays stat programs use 'hits' to refer to individual server requests, which can be dozens in a single visit, as you get thumbnails and page elements and stuff, and also counts every time an image is viewed through someone's friends' list. For example, xkcd on a good day lately can get up to half a million hits, and that translates to about 15,000-20,000 visitors to the site itself. A better measure, and the one I know Drew of Toothpaste for Dinner prefers, is unique visitors per month. I won't really know until this month is out -- last month was about 100,000, and this month is looking to be closer to 200,000. Drew recently put on his misc page that he gets about 450,000 uniques a month.

Also, comic tracker sites like The Webcomics List could make slightly better traffic-rankers than Alexa. xkcd gets there currently about 125 views / month; something big, say, Questionable Content, 5800. There's still issues to watch out for, like ratings falling due to a comic not beïng tracked properly, or rising due to a comic advertizing on-site. Still, this givs at least hints.

Alexa is indeed about the only game in town for comparative traffic data, and it suffers from sampling problems -- it's more complicated than this, but for one thing it probably underrepresents Firefox (and by the way -- xkcd readers prefer Firefox over IE by about 2:1, wildly skewed from the regular internet. Conclusion: we're awesome!)

Also remember that the traffic order (but not magnitude) of ComicGenesis is freely available.

Maybe I should just take a statistics course or three and just become The Webcomic Survey Guy…

A lot of people won't put up their accurate numbers just 'cause they're small, or misread their own statistics if they're not gathered well or presented with confusing terminology -- there are different ways to measure, etc. With privately-run servers, it's just plain a hard problem.

I don't make a big deal about the stats just 'cause it feels like bragging, and I know my friends are probably sick of hearing about my damn website. I can't help but note, though, that if you go off the last one-week average of Alexa rank, xkcd is something like 9,000th, putting it barely in the top 10 for webcomics [that I've heard of or found to include in list of about 300]. And that's WITH a possible anti-Firefox bias. I don't care if it's ridiculously inaccurate data, I'm just gonna sit and look at that number happily for a little bit.

Thank you so much for reading, everyone. It's been awesome and will continue to be more so.

SNEAK PIECE OF INFORMATION as a reward for reading through this: next week is xkcd's first Parody Week, during which a new comic will be posted every weekday.