Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sairu

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 delete --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:27, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sairu

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

It is not clear from the article which of her cosplay activities are Wikipedia notable. They need to be covered by reliable third-party sources independent of the subject, not blogs or fan articles. It does not say who officially sponsors her or how she goes about her occupation; the ones that are listed are not sourced, and would just pick from a pool of local models in the area anyway. Has she won any notable contests? Appeared on covers for notable magazines (not cosplay blogs)? No equivalent article at Wikipedia Japan, French. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:37, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:39, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:39, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:39, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:39, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As she is a model, please consider if she meets WP:NMODEL. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:48, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete looks like a self/fan promotion article. Edit and contribute history's show us a single purpose account wrote the article and it sets off flags. Cosplayers and models are ten a penny and we are not their agent or pr company.SephyTheThird (talk) 22:45, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I find it hard to distinguish the subject's notabilty because of the original author's persistent vandalism of the page. That author (Wikisaichan) is a single-purpose account, who alternates with a single-purpose IP (118.1.138.55) making similar edits. They consistently add inappropriate material, remove maintenance tags, wreck the formatting, and refuse to engage on the Talk pages (either the article's or the User Talk page). As an example of how it makes assessment difficult, I just checked the first 12 references in "Career", and they are all either dead links or do not mention anything that supports the statement in the article. I have removed this sort of thing all too often in the past, only to have it put back by this editor. At that point, the will to live was fading so I had to stop - but I'm sure you get the point. The only half-way reasonable references seem to be the interviews in 3rd-strike.com and the Mercenar blog (though I can't evaluate the Japanese sources).--Gronk Oz (talk) 04:50, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Salt - I went searching for the NHK and TV Tokyo interviews and found only one source in Japanese that wasn't a minor Japanese rock band with the same name, and that happened to be a semi-nude modeling DVD which is unbelievably used as a reference in the article. There is no WP:NMODEL or anything else to speak of here in the form of Japanese sources and with regards to this article I recommend the use of tactical nuclear weapons. Jun Kayama 05:33, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as the references do not prove notability. The main two editors do not seem to cooporate. Ana r chyte 09:32, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I love the cute Chi picture but that isn't enough to show how she is notable, delete per WP:NMODEL. I do not believe this needs to be salted as there is always WP:ANI for disruptive editing. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:58, 18 January 2016 (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.