Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/6 Angels


 * 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. Article has been edited to cite sources.  Sandstein  07:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

6 Angels

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable, unsourced, no third party coverage — Preceding unsigned comment added by Little Professor (talk • contribs) 11:30, 25 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.  -- —Farix (t &#124; c) 18:12, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This nomination was not completed until 18:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC). —Farix (t &#124; c) 18:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep this is obscure for two reasons: it was never released in the US and it was apparently "CRAP!!" to quote one review. But neither is necessarily a cause for deletion.  I'm generally comfortable assuming Japanese-language print sources exist for virtually any anime series, as anime and manga are pretty well covered by the media there.  This looks like it might be a place to start as far as sources go. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  19:24, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:53, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:53, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment If it is the case as Starblind notes above, I would be reluctant to recommend deletion without the input from editors knowledgeable about anime, and who is also knowledgeable about reliable sources for anime. Punkrocker1991 (talk) 04:18, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:58, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep it's real, seems to be a fairly significant production (wasn't just some guy who drew on napkins and waved them in front of a camera), and that's a poor but somewhat accurate description for our inclusion criteria for anime films. The article just needs work. Everything needs work. Wikipedia is really big. I need to go to sleep. -- Ned Scott 10:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I gave the article a cleanup, and agree with Andrew Lenahan. Japanese-language sources exist for just about every anime film, even the total crap.  We can ask that Japanese reading Wikipedians with access to such assist in additional sourcing.  What can be fixed is no reason to delete.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 03:44, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree with the others. Major production, sure to get coverage.   D r e a m Focus  07:53, 9 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete While the film may have been released, with only the single review, it does not pass WP:NOTE. I've removed the references to ANN's encyclopedia because it is not a reliable source because the content is user generated with almost no editorial oversight or even basic fact-checking. —Farix (t &#124; c) 12:37, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * 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.