Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baka-Tsuki


 * 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.  Sandstein  17:30, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Baka-Tsuki

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

An article on a website which hosts unauthorized translations of Japanese media such as light novels and video games. I admit that I sometimes browse the site, but the website, as popular as it is, has not really been covered in reliable sources. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:08, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:09, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:09, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:09, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:09, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete It needs secondary source coverage like Napster or The Pirate Bay for starters for it to be notable. It doesn't mean they have to be prosecuted though. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 02:35, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment This reminds me a bit of moegirl . Same kind of things, but no secondary sources to establish notability. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:14, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete The internet is full of resources for obtaining grey area or downright blatantly pirated media and manga is no exception. Only a few trackers and other "download databases" become their own media story and generate press, and Napster and TPB to use the above examples are notorious for their own reasons (usually because of well publicised attempts to take them down). Internet forums and perhaps blogs will be full of mentions of Baka Tsuki, but they aren't reliable sources and age doesn't prove notability. The big anime and manga sites would never dare discuss them unless there was a pretty big reason so unless I've missed a big news story I don't think there are likely to be many, if any reliable sources. SephyTheThird (talk) 23:09, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete While fan translations play a vital role in the Western popularity of anime and manga and the phenomenon itself is notable, individual sites like this lack coverage. I couldn't find any mention of the site in reliable animanga sources, and only two passing mentions in published book sources. (one in a translation used as a citation, and another in an interview of an American fan) Opencooper (talk) 00:12, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Without third party feedback we cant consider this website notable. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:33, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. This site is popular and I even have their app on my phone, however BT has always flown pretty solidly under the radar, partially because they operate in that grey area of legality but also because light novel translations have never really ever gained the attention that manga scanlations have. I adore the site, but the site just doesn't pass notability guidelines per NWEB. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:04, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Very weak keep or perhapas a merge to scanlation would be better. I managed to scrape together some coverage: Kotaku has an article dedicated to Baka-Tsuki, and how "the light novel translating community" is centered around it 1. Game Industry News mentions Baka-Tsuki as "the biggest Light Novel Translation hub in the world" 2. Also name-dropped by The Daily Star and Cartoon Cultures: The Globalization of Japanese Popular Media. 3 4 Pinging on whether they're open to a merge since their !votes are based on Baka-Tsuki having no coverage whatsoever.  Satellizer el Bridget  (Talk)  14:24, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Good finds. Based on that I would support a merge, though maybe Light novel would be a better target since this is mainly translation while scanlation refers to a process based around comics. Opencooper (talk) 14:42, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll give you Kotaku. I don't know about GIN as a source as this is the first time I've come across it but saying he has an admin position at the site isn't exactly neutral and it is a passing mention. The latter two don't give any significance to the site, daily star just mentions it as being the place to go to download a particular work. And the book mention is just an interview with someone bragging about his torrenting resources. I don't think they would pass as sources in general, never mind notability. More like Kotaku and I would be more receptive, but as it stands I don't think my opinion has changed.SephyTheThird (talk) 15:41, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 05:44, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete at best as there's still nothing confidently suggesting the needed solid independent notability and searches have found nothing better. SwisterTwister   talk  07:44, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is purely promotional. Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  02:22, 20 June 2016 (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.