Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/My Hero Academia

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Wifione ^Message 18:52, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My Hero Academia

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Also known as Boku no Hiro Academia. Recent series from Shonen Jump. Only six months old which makes it difficult to establish notability due to a lack of critical discussion or impact outside of fan opinions. Being in Jump does not itself give notability. While we have sales data for the first (and so far only) collected volume), this alone is not enough to prove notability. I believe that future notability is likely, but at this moment it's yet to be established by the standard we impose on other articles. Therefore I would suggest userfication so the article can be developed until it becomes more notable.

I have done a basic search for the series but unsurprisingly most results are for illegal hosting of the series or fan comments. ANN didn't turn up any obvious info beside it launching and the sales chart for the period it was released. I have already asked the original poster and the user who added some information to the article if they had any further info to add and they both said no - neither objected to the idea of an AFD. SephyTheThird (talk) 00:09, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, so what else would you need to make it notable? -A random editor — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.191.148.3 (talk) 16:47, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Broadly speaking, some sort of third-party coverage. Like an actual review or something. Doesn't even have to be in English. 12.249.243.118 (talk) 16:51, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. --SephyTheThird (talk) 00:11, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This seems to be an interview about it. Can someone who knows Japanese see if it is? Also, is this a review?--Cattus ^talk 03:12, 4 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The first one is an interview with Horikoshi's editor. The second is a review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:BC6A:D800:DC34:101D:1605:EDC0 (talk) 01:06, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks.--Cattus ^talk 12:40, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think the article is sufficiently notable now. What do you guys think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.191.148.3 (talk) 13:06, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Arguably, the mere fact it charted at all should be enough to establish notability. Not every manga ever gets to do that. For example, manga such as YuruYuri and Sakura Trick have articles despite never charting, although that's because they have anime adaptation. Plus it already has a review, so it should be good to go. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 12:59, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with "charting at all" is that it then becomes very easy to say something is notable when it only just creeps onto a chart with 500 copies. Clearly this isn't remotely like that but it could be taken by some as an excuse to use the same argument for much more obscure works. Your second point pretty much answers itself. As the review is hosted by a print publisher I agree we probably have enough when combined with the chart figure. The work itself seems like it's going to be around for a while, but it's unusual for Jump series to become notable in 6 months. I'd also argue that the page has improved from the exposure. SephyTheThird (talk) 16:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:39, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So @SephyTheThird:, you're essentially withdrawing this nomination? Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 02:07, 10 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep:Notability established.—Ryūlóng (琉竜) 10:39, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:51, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.