Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bokko (manga)


 * 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. Keilana | Parlez ici 05:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Bokko (manga)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Is this fiction or history? The article is simply too poor (and naturally, completely unreferenced) to tell even this much. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:29, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Another example of why there MUST be some sort of peer review system before new articles get anywhere near article namespace. To the policy wonks out there yes I know I have not quoted policy or guidelines (not sure if there is for this case) but this sort of article shows why we have to develop some stringent policy, guidelines, or systems.-- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 00:24, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you explain exactly why it should be deleted? What policies does it fail? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:09, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * How about WP:WRITETHEARTICLEFIRST? This was just such a flimsy, unintelligible draft that it wasn't ready to press Save. Andy Dingley (talk) 08:30, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * How about reading WP:UGLY? Just because the article was unintelligible doesn't mean it should be deleted, especially if it is notable. On the contrary, it should be cleaned up and expanded. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:52, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Following expansion post-nom, WP:UGLY would now apply and there's a chance that it's saveable - although the general requirement for sourcing still isn't met. As it was though, WP:CSD would be closer to it. Andy Dingley (talk) 11:20, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


 * You don't need to say delete if you are the nominator. And you prodded this article for deletion 30 minutes after it was created, despite it saying this manga won a notable award.   D r e a m Focus  16:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


 * ??? -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 21:58, 1 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. A Battle of Wits (2006 film) was an adaptation of the novel with the same name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kzl.zawlin (talk • contribs) 02:04, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. I cleaned up the article a little. This manga won the Shogakukan Manga Award, one of the major manga awards in Japan (I have added a reference as proof), and thus satisfies WP:BK. Michitaro (talk) 03:38, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It still fails WP:BK as unverifiable, as there's no English language sourcing for this. It's possible the the manga project specifically would accept the Japanese source that's there as adequate, but it's far from being a general pass for books, per our usual standards for books in general. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:26, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * You are mistaken about what sort of sources are acceptable on Wikipedia. Even though this is the English-language Wikipedia, sources are not required to be in English.  Sources can be in any language (see Sources under WP:GNG).  A source in another language is just as good for showing notability as one in English.  The information certainly is verifiable, as there are lots of people who work on the English language Wikipedia who can also read Japanese. Calathan (talk) 04:09, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * In fact, many of the sources in our articles on our articles about Japanese topics (even the GAs and FAs) are in, what else, Japanese. But without such sources, the information on such articles would be very incomplete, especially for anime or manga that have not received a North American release. Try to read a good or featured article on Wikipedia about something from Japan and look at the sources. See if many of such sources are Japanese. Of course, being the English Wikipedia, we have some bias towards English sources, but this should be discouraged. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 05:31, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 03:44, 29 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Borderline keep It's a little hard to find sources (search reveals many illegal scanlation sites), but the fact that it won a major Japanese award should be enough to establish some notability. However, more sources should be found, especially Japanese ones. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 04:09, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep due to passing WP:BK. In addition to having received a major manga award, it was adapted into a movie (based on, the movie was adapted from the manga rather than directly from the novel).  The manga therefore passes both criteria 2 and 3 of WP:BK.  While more sources would certainly be helpful in expanding the article, it is clearly a notable topic, and there is no reason not to keep a stub on the topic even if it can't be expanded further based on the current sources. Calathan (talk) 04:49, 29 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment CSE hits. --Gwern (contribs) 16:07 29 April 2012 (GMT)
 * Keep Notable award, and made into a film, as others have said. And please stop rushing things to AFD so much.   D r e a m Focus  16:36, 30 April 2012 (UTC)
 * In all fairness, the article as originally posted was fairly incomprehensible and bordered on speedy territory. 192.251.134.5 (talk) 14:00, 1 May 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment The only thing notable about this is the Shogakukan award. From what I've found, the film was based on the actual novel. When/If an article for the novel is ever created, it should be merged there. DragonZero  ( Talk  ·  Contribs ) 10:12, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I just checked. Yep.  The film is not related to the manga at all, both written by different people, based on the same historical novel.   D r e a m Focus  11:30, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * What sources say that the movie was adapted from the novel directly, not from the manga? I know information on IMDB isn't always correct, but it says the movie was adapted from the manga .  Is there a more definitive source that says the movie was adapted directly from the novel? Calathan (talk) 12:46, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * A Battle of Wits (2006 film) was what I was going on. It says it was based on the historical novel, and that a manga was also based on that novel.  But its in the category of "films based on manga" so maybe I'm misreading the lead.  I just searched Google news archive, and it says it was based on the manga also.  So I'll clarify that.   D r e a m Focus  16:16, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep: The award is unverifiable my butt. SL93 (talk) 22:22, 1 May 2012 (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.