Wikipedia:Japan-related topics notice board/New Japan-related articles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Please feel free to list newly created Japan-related articles here. Any new articles that have an interesting or unusual fact in them should be suggested for the Did you know? box on the Main Wikipedia page. DYN has a 72 hr. time limit from the creation of the article.

Please note that you need to watch the Newest Japan-related articles template to see recent changes for this month, as they will not appear on this page.

This month's newest articles[edit]

The following are some of the newest Japan-related articles on Wikipedia for the month of March. Please feel free to edit this list.

You can watch this list to see the latest changes.

If you have a new train-related article, please also place it on Newest articles about trains in Japan.

Automatically generated list[edit]

For an automatically generated list of new articles likely related to Japan, see Wikipedia:WikiProject Japan#New articles.

Manually maintained list[edit]

C, C, & C. Boneyard90 (talk) 14:37, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
C-class. See Talk:Inazuma Eleven (manga) for comments. Boneyard90 (talk) 14:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Start-class. See Talk:Rōmon for commentary. Boneyard90 (talk) 08:42, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Start Class. Boneyard90 (talk) 13:55, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
B-Class. See Talk:Glossary of Japanese swords for Commentary. Boneyard90 (talk) 13:43, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
Assessed Start class. Boneyard90 (talk) 13:29, 7 January 2011 (UTC)



You can see WikiProject Japan or Manual of Style (Japan-related articles) for additional current issues and discussion.
Archives


Japan[edit]

Haruna Ono[edit]

Haruna Ono (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Haruna Ono" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

The article fails WP:MUSICBIO should be redirected to Scandal (Japanese band) Karlhard (talk) 23:44, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:13, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:13, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment. So why didn't you just redirect it? Unless you do that and it's reverted it doesn't really need to come to AfD. --Michig (talk) 08:32, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Without discussing with others contributors I can't make any changes. --Karlhard (talk) 14:42, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Any potential redirect should, if likely to be controversial, be discussed on the article's talk page. --Michig (talk) 15:22, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
(Find sources: "小野春菜" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Voyager, a Journey through Time and Water[edit]

Voyager, a Journey through Time and Water (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Voyager, a Journey through Time and Water" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Some indications of WP:NOTABILITY, but not enough for me to establish it. No Japanese or Italian articles. Has been tagged for notability for seven years; hopefully we can now resolve it. Part of the problem is linguistic, hopefully someone can help there. Boleyn (talk) 07:22, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

Pinging those who have looked at its notability before (it has been nominated for speedy and prod): Gillyweed who tagged it for notability in the first place, BigDunc whonominated it for speedy deletion and then prodded, Moonriddengirl who looked at the speedy nomination, DGG who rejected the prod. Boleyn (talk) 07:24, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete - I can't even find an IMDB entry. Is that the correct name? МандичкаYO 😜 07:50, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect - to the artist article. The exhibition is mentioned there, and I've added the name of the film, but I don't think we really need a merger so to speak. It would overwhelm the artist article. The original source that supported the article is still visible via Wayback - the name is correct. But standalone notability seems really doubtful, and it's been hanging out in this shape long enough. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 10:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:25, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:25, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
(Find sources: "Marco Mazzi, Voyager, a Journey through Time and Water" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)
  • Redirect to and a slight expansion of its information at the Marco Mazzi artist's article. Schmidt, Michael Q. 19:42, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Marco Mazzi as per the comments above--not notable as an independent work but worth a little expansion in the artist article. Fisheriesmgmt (talk) 15:23, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Magical Pokémon Journey[edit]

Magical Pokémon Journey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Magical Pokémon Journey" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG. Searches into Google, Yahoo! and Bing yield nothing substantial, only places to purchase this manga and fan-based/user-generated websites. No mentions of reviews from reliable reporters or awards etc. In, addition, this manga does not have its own page on the Japanese Wikipedia. KirtZJ (talk) 10:21, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Comment Not that I found anything substantial to present, but there is a JAWP article ja:ポケットモンスター PiPiPi★アドベンチャー. Though through a quick skim JAWP actually has less content than in ENWP and zero sources. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 11:50, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Addendum Looking a bit down the AfD log and seems like nom just forgot to clear that last sentence when copying his similar nom from the similarly desolate Be a Master! Pokemon B & W (AfD), which actually has no JAWP article. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 11:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Good news! - I found a mention book review in Manga: The Complete Guide by Jason Thompson. See Google Books PT685. WhisperToMe (talk) 11:57, 25 March 2015 (UTC) (Corrected my reply as of 14:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)) WhisperToMe (talk) 14:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
One mention is hardly the significant coverage as stipulated at GNG. Show me how this topic is notable based on how the wikiproject selects articles for creation. The Japanese wiki search was an error on my part, even though that page is still in pretty bad shape. —KirtZMessage 12:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
The source does in fact contribute to the notability because it has Wikipedia:Significant coverage: Jason Thompson gives his opinion of the work and explains what he likes about it. The book is a collection of manga reviews and reviews do contribute to the notability of the works they are about. In fact, I shouldn't have called it a "mention"... I should have made clear what it really was (you can look at the source yourself and see what it has).
"Show me how this topic is notable based on how the wikiproject selects articles for creation." - KirtZ, all I need to do is show that this topic meets WP:GNG. The moment it meets GNG, it's notable, and the article is kept.
WhisperToMe (talk) 13:50, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Based on your arguments over a single source and since I'm pretty sure you'll present the same argument if a single source surfaces for the other page, I'm not even gonna bother debating here. I can already see the "kept based on no consensus" vote showing up. —KirtZMessage 14:25, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
This may be source #2: "Viz Manga/Book News" (Archive). Anime News Network. November 12, 1999. it says that Viz has released a press release but I'm not sure if this is a verbatim press release, or a new article based on it.
It is a good thing when one reliable source is found.
WhisperToMe (talk) 14:35, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Found source #2 "Viz Manga/Book News" (Archive). Anime News Network. November 12, 1999. is not a press release authored by Viz (it is a secondary source based on Viz's press release, rather than being a verbatim press release)
WhisperToMe (talk) 14:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep-Seems notable enough. Wgolf (talk) 01:58, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep as a typical notable manga article. VMS Mosaic (talk) 06:22, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Except nothing suggests that it is. SephyTheThird (talk) 21:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 13:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 13:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete Merge to Pokémon (manga) - The sources found above include one review and an announcement of the release, im not seeing any in depth coverage here. Normally when I think of notability in fiction I think of at least three or more reviews along with if possible some additional real world information through reliable sources. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:36, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Merge/Redirect to the parent article for manga of the franchise As much as Thompson's review can be used for reception, it's not a sign of notability. As the aim of the book is to provide reviews (or at the least, comments) of more or less all manga released in english at the time of publication, it does not differentiate between notability or success. It's not any different from how Anime Encyclopaedia isn't a indication of notability, the scope is different but the basic idea is the same. Additionally. a news item based on a press release is no better than the original press release as notability evidence. Also, the existence of an article at Ja.Wiki is irrelevant as we can't use Wikipedia as a source anyway, therefore it has no bearing on the discussion. SephyTheThird (talk) 21:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment: "of more or less all manga released in english at the time of publication, it does not differentiate between notability or success" - One could say the same thing about a book of Roger Ebert's reviews or a book of reviews from any person who reviews feature films. The fact that it's a feature film at all is a "screen" of notability, and likewise with the fact that the manga have been deemed as commercially viable to translate for foreign audiences. The fact that a review published a reliable secondary source exists at all inherently adds notability. It is not analogous to an automated database such as IMDB or the ANN database. It is instead analogous to ANN's published reviews of manga: it makes a statement evaluating the series. Also consider the author of the review, Jason Thompson.
  • I am actually surprised that the Japanese Wikipedia userbase had not located significant magazines that regularly publish reviews of manga, analogous to American newspapers publishing feature film reviews, or a manga equivalent of Famitsu.
  • WhisperToMe (talk) 03:47, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment If anyone knows Japanese you could go to the Ja.Wiki page and use their sources. I don't know Japanese so I'm of no help in this regard. Psychotic Spartan 123 07:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
    Comment I agree with Sephy. Let me clarify one thing. The Japanese Wikipedia has zero sources. This is a Japanese manga. The reason I mentioned the Japanese Wiki in the first place was that I had hoped if an article existed there, then they might have found some kind of notability to warrant its existence. If you look at the article they created however, clearly they did not. A deletion and merge would be the best bet here. —KirtZMessage 13:38, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
    Ja. Wiki is typically useless for helping with English articles. Even if they exist they tend not to have any sources at all and they have next to no process involved so articles tend to be basic (even major franchises can just end up being unverified lists). It should be checked but the assumption should always be that it won't be helpful until proven otherwise. You an certainly use it as a starting place in some cases, but only at the very start of research - it's a lot easier to research when you are checking information already available.SephyTheThird (talk) 16:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment If someone wants to they can summarize and include the info on Pokémon (manga) which its-self is lacking sources. As I said above I do not think this is notable, not for a stand alone article anyways as of yet. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:20, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Ukarete iru hito[edit]

Ukarete iru hito (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Ukarete iru hito" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Contested prod-unotable album Wgolf (talk) 19:06, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

1st Demo[edit]

1st Demo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "1st Demo" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Okay for some reason the first time it didn't go through and I'll try it again-contested prod of a unotable album Wgolf (talk) 21:52, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Comment and now it appears twice on the AFD page....Wgolf (talk) 21:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
I have removed the second appearance. When something like that happens, you can just edit the daily log to fix it. JohnCD (talk) 22:23, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Pinhole (song)[edit]

Pinhole (song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Pinhole (song)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Contested deletion-unotable song Wgolf (talk) 16:55, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Ogre You Asshole (album)[edit]

Ogre You Asshole (album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Ogre You Asshole (album)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Contested prod by the creator-unotable music album Wgolf (talk) 16:31, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:54, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment JAWP does not have a separate article for the album, but ja:OGRE YOU ASSHOLE (band) has a list of interviews at the end that interested keepers might find useful. Baseline is redirect to Ogre You Asshole (band). 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 01:12, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

Ayumi Oka (actress)[edit]

Ayumi Oka (actress) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Ayumi Oka (actress)" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)
(Find sources: "岡あゆみ" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Unotable actress-even her foreign wikis are basically have no info. (Philippines has nothing and the Japanese one is just a filmography from what I can tell) Surprise this has been around this long. Wgolf (talk) 19:28, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

  • Delete as fails NACTOR & GNG - The 2 cites on article at the Japan 'pedia are blogs, I can't find any evidence of notability so will have to say Delete, If by some miracle someone can find something I would reconsider my !vote, –Davey2010Talk 22:51, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Amazing how this article has been here for...are you ready? TEN YEARS!!! Wgolf (talk) 22:54, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep - Very surprisingly someone has found something - Not entirely convinced on the whole notability thing but I'm sure it can and will end up being expanded sometime this year so meh Keep it. –Davey2010Talk 00:32, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:39, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment Just because the article is only one line does not mean there is nothing on her. Oricon has two recent articles on her: [1] [2]. And quite a number of news sources covered her pregnancy and birth: [3]�, [4], [5], etc. And a quick search of Web Oya (which indexes popular magazines) finds 14 articles on her stretching back to 1999, when she first became famous for appearing in Kimpachi Sensei. Some are not exclusively on her, but some are, including articles in Saizo in 2007, Mono Magajin in 2007, Junon in 2002, Shukan josei in 2002, Potato in 2002, and Oricon Week in 2000. Michitaro (talk) 18:06, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep while I understand the reasons behind the nomination (the current state of the article is close to CSD-A7), and WP:BEFORE for Japanese subjects could be really difficult, sources above by Michitaro appears to be enough for a claim of notability. Cavarrone 20:51, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:01, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment Adding Japanese language {{Find sources AFD}}. She has given birth to a baby boy approx. 1 year ago and that got a number of coverage (not that this is the evidence of notability, but IMO entertainment news will not do trivial things like baby news for people who are not at least somewhat well-known). 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 01:48, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Marin Honda[edit]

Marin Honda (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Marin Honda" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)
(Find sources: "本田真凜" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Not notable according to Wikipedia:WikiProject Figure Skating/Notability. No competitive bio at isuresults.com Hergilei (talk) 13:20, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:58, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 23:48, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (yak) @ 20:13, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep per the references identified by Hisashiyarouin. She is notable outside of her skating career. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 06:30, 30 March 2015 (UTC)





Anime and manga[edit]

Magical Pokémon Journey[edit]

Magical Pokémon Journey (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Magical Pokémon Journey" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG. Searches into Google, Yahoo! and Bing yield nothing substantial, only places to purchase this manga and fan-based/user-generated websites. No mentions of reviews from reliable reporters or awards etc. In, addition, this manga does not have its own page on the Japanese Wikipedia. KirtZJ (talk) 10:21, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Comment Not that I found anything substantial to present, but there is a JAWP article ja:ポケットモンスター PiPiPi★アドベンチャー. Though through a quick skim JAWP actually has less content than in ENWP and zero sources. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 11:50, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Addendum Looking a bit down the AfD log and seems like nom just forgot to clear that last sentence when copying his similar nom from the similarly desolate Be a Master! Pokemon B & W (AfD), which actually has no JAWP article. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 11:55, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Good news! - I found a mention book review in Manga: The Complete Guide by Jason Thompson. See Google Books PT685. WhisperToMe (talk) 11:57, 25 March 2015 (UTC) (Corrected my reply as of 14:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)) WhisperToMe (talk) 14:03, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
One mention is hardly the significant coverage as stipulated at GNG. Show me how this topic is notable based on how the wikiproject selects articles for creation. The Japanese wiki search was an error on my part, even though that page is still in pretty bad shape. —KirtZMessage 12:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
The source does in fact contribute to the notability because it has Wikipedia:Significant coverage: Jason Thompson gives his opinion of the work and explains what he likes about it. The book is a collection of manga reviews and reviews do contribute to the notability of the works they are about. In fact, I shouldn't have called it a "mention"... I should have made clear what it really was (you can look at the source yourself and see what it has).
"Show me how this topic is notable based on how the wikiproject selects articles for creation." - KirtZ, all I need to do is show that this topic meets WP:GNG. The moment it meets GNG, it's notable, and the article is kept.
WhisperToMe (talk) 13:50, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Based on your arguments over a single source and since I'm pretty sure you'll present the same argument if a single source surfaces for the other page, I'm not even gonna bother debating here. I can already see the "kept based on no consensus" vote showing up. —KirtZMessage 14:25, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
This may be source #2: "Viz Manga/Book News" (Archive). Anime News Network. November 12, 1999. it says that Viz has released a press release but I'm not sure if this is a verbatim press release, or a new article based on it.
It is a good thing when one reliable source is found.
WhisperToMe (talk) 14:35, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Found source #2 "Viz Manga/Book News" (Archive). Anime News Network. November 12, 1999. is not a press release authored by Viz (it is a secondary source based on Viz's press release, rather than being a verbatim press release)
WhisperToMe (talk) 14:56, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep-Seems notable enough. Wgolf (talk) 01:58, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep as a typical notable manga article. VMS Mosaic (talk) 06:22, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Except nothing suggests that it is. SephyTheThird (talk) 21:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 13:57, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Lakun.patra (talk) 13:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete Merge to Pokémon (manga) - The sources found above include one review and an announcement of the release, im not seeing any in depth coverage here. Normally when I think of notability in fiction I think of at least three or more reviews along with if possible some additional real world information through reliable sources. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:36, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Merge/Redirect to the parent article for manga of the franchise As much as Thompson's review can be used for reception, it's not a sign of notability. As the aim of the book is to provide reviews (or at the least, comments) of more or less all manga released in english at the time of publication, it does not differentiate between notability or success. It's not any different from how Anime Encyclopaedia isn't a indication of notability, the scope is different but the basic idea is the same. Additionally. a news item based on a press release is no better than the original press release as notability evidence. Also, the existence of an article at Ja.Wiki is irrelevant as we can't use Wikipedia as a source anyway, therefore it has no bearing on the discussion. SephyTheThird (talk) 21:56, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment: "of more or less all manga released in english at the time of publication, it does not differentiate between notability or success" - One could say the same thing about a book of Roger Ebert's reviews or a book of reviews from any person who reviews feature films. The fact that it's a feature film at all is a "screen" of notability, and likewise with the fact that the manga have been deemed as commercially viable to translate for foreign audiences. The fact that a review published a reliable secondary source exists at all inherently adds notability. It is not analogous to an automated database such as IMDB or the ANN database. It is instead analogous to ANN's published reviews of manga: it makes a statement evaluating the series. Also consider the author of the review, Jason Thompson.
  • I am actually surprised that the Japanese Wikipedia userbase had not located significant magazines that regularly publish reviews of manga, analogous to American newspapers publishing feature film reviews, or a manga equivalent of Famitsu.
  • WhisperToMe (talk) 03:47, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment If anyone knows Japanese you could go to the Ja.Wiki page and use their sources. I don't know Japanese so I'm of no help in this regard. Psychotic Spartan 123 07:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
    Comment I agree with Sephy. Let me clarify one thing. The Japanese Wikipedia has zero sources. This is a Japanese manga. The reason I mentioned the Japanese Wiki in the first place was that I had hoped if an article existed there, then they might have found some kind of notability to warrant its existence. If you look at the article they created however, clearly they did not. A deletion and merge would be the best bet here. —KirtZMessage 13:38, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
    Ja. Wiki is typically useless for helping with English articles. Even if they exist they tend not to have any sources at all and they have next to no process involved so articles tend to be basic (even major franchises can just end up being unverified lists). It should be checked but the assumption should always be that it won't be helpful until proven otherwise. You an certainly use it as a starting place in some cases, but only at the very start of research - it's a lot easier to research when you are checking information already available.SephyTheThird (talk) 16:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Comment If someone wants to they can summarize and include the info on Pokémon (manga) which its-self is lacking sources. As I said above I do not think this is notable, not for a stand alone article anyways as of yet. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:20, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Be a Master! Pokemon B & W[edit]

Be a Master! Pokemon B & W (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD · Stats)
(Find sources: "Be a Master! Pokemon B & W" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR)

Fails WP:GNG. Searches into Google, Yahoo! and Bing yield nothing substantial, only fan-based/user-generated websites. No mentions of reviews from reliable reporters or awards etc. In, addition, this manga does not have its own page on the Japanese Wikipedia. KirtZJ (talk) 10:19, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Symbol question.svg Question: - Did you search the Japanese title? I also think it may be good to make an inquiry at the Japanese Wikipedia about this topic. WhisperToMe (talk) 12:10, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
There is no need to make an inquiry there. If it was notable, we wouldn't have trouble finding significant coverage. Show me how this is notable. A manga does not get an article simply because it exists. If anything, it gets mentioned in a parent article. —KirtZMessage 12:42, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
There is a need to make an inquiry there. He's why: the language barrier. I understand that the burden of proof is needed to prove notability and not the other way around, but also please note that many native English speakers may find great difficulty in finding sources in Japanese. Remember that sources in any language may prove notability. Now, if the Japanese fail to find any reliable sources that would cement the case for consolidating this article into a list of Pokemon manga. if they Japanese do find sources, then that cements the case for keeping the article. Anyway, ja:Wikipedia:Help_for_Non-Japanese_Speakers#Question_about_.E7.A9.B6.E3.82.81.E3.82.8D.EF.BC.81.E3.83.9D.E3.82.B1.E3.83.A2.E3.83.B3B.E3.83.BBW_.28Be_a_Master.21_Pokemon_B_.26_W.29 is my inquiry. I also started ja:プロジェクト‐ノート:ポケモン#Help_needed_in_finding_Japanese_sources_for_.E7.A9.B6.E3.82.81.E3.82.8D.EF.BC.81.E3.83.9D.E3.82.B1.E3.83.A2.E3.83.B3B.E3.83.BBW at the Japanese Pokemon WikiProject, and ja:プロジェクト‐ノート:漫画#Help_needed_in_finding_Japanese_sources_for_.E7.A9.B6.E3.82.81.E3.82.8D.EF.BC.81.E3.83.9D.E3.82.B1.E3.83.A2.E3.83.B3B.E3.83.BBW at the Japanese Comics WikiProject. WhisperToMe (talk) 13:46, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Google searches imply a search was done in non-English as well... —KirtZMessage 14:26, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
If one doesn't have any knowledge of Japanese (or Chinese, Korean, Arabic, etc.) it may be difficult to make heads or tails of any of the results one gets. It's necessary to ask people who have knowledge of the language, as they can determine what the sources say, and whether the sources are reliable. WhisperToMe (talk) 15:05, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Came here in response to WhisperToMe's inquiry at ja:Wikipedia:Help for Non-Japanese Speakers. National Diet Library's Search engine with the option to cross-search within all the cooperating database services turned on returned the manga itself and the NDL itself's index. Neither of CiNii Books' content search nor its Article full-text search returned results. Searching within established news sites using news.google.co.jp (with language set to Japanese) did not return relevant hits. A query on books.google.co.jp returned 6 results, but out of them, four was the author's own work. One predated the date this manga was published and is likely a false positive. Another hit (Manga Science) happens to be a manga I'm personally fond of, but that is an educational manga on science and I am sure that the hit was a false positive. In conclusion, I could not find even a passing mention of the manga in any reliable sources, let alone anything that will let me believe that this manga would be notable for inclusion in Wikipedia unless someone can provide a pointer to a reference that proves otherwise. --朝彦 | Asahiko (talk) 18:29, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the analysis! It's disappointing but it's good that this was done. If no further sources are found by the end of this AFD, merge into Pokémon (manga) WhisperToMe (talk) 19:02, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Keep-Notable enough. Wgolf (talk) 01:59, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
based on the above extensively researched information, you really need to provide an explanation.SephyTheThird (talk) 20:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Delete No sources have been found to establish notability here. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 21:30, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Merge/Delete Extensive research above suggests lack of notability. SephyTheThird (talk) 21:47, 28 March 2015 (UTC)
    What sourced reliable information is there to merge though? All I see is WP:OR here. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:24, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

Anime and manga categories, templates, and misc[edit]

Proposed deletions[edit]


Archives[edit]

→ 2005: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 ♦ ♦ ♦ → 2006: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12
→ 2007: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 ♦ ♦ ♦ → 2008: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12
→ 2009: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 - 8 - 9 - 10 - 11 - 12 ♦ ♦ ♦ → 2010: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4