Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dead Tube


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  J 947  18:21, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Dead Tube

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Nominating this manga's article for deletion is somewhat disappointing considering I read it (or at least I used to). But the manga lacks significant coverage in reliable sources in either English or Japanese; a search for English sources resulted mostly in the usual illegal scanlation sites, while a search for Japanese sources failed to find any significant coverage either. I couldn't even find sales figures for the manga. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 22:55, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Given the sources given below, I'm changing my !vote to Keep. However, this is not to be taken as a withdrawal of the AfD. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:17, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 22:56, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep The series has been licensed in France by Delcourt / Tonkam. There are reviews at Manga News and Planete BD, both considered reliable sources by WikiProject Anime and manga's consensus. Thus it should meet the notability guidelines for books, which requires coverage in two or more reliable sources. Opencooper (talk) 23:33, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * That's odd, those sources didn't appear in my search. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:08, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah one aspect of google is that results are tailored towards your location, though searching on google.fr, Planet BD only shows up on the third page of results so the sites don't have great search rankings anyway. I might recommend instead using Gwern's custom google search made for the wikiproject, where Manga News is the third result, but Planete BD isn't there. The way I found these was by searching each site in the French list of the WikIProject page using the   feature of google. So most important of all was knowing that it was licensed, which I learned from the frwiki article. Opencooper (talk) 03:05, 12 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment I don't see any news articles over at ANN for this subject or the usual critics. Can you confirm whether Natalie, Planete BD and Manga News actually critique the show and not just preview/announce it. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 16:51, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Natalie just has announcements about the manga (it's more of a news site than original reviews). But yes I can confirm that the other two sources have reviews: The Manga News reviews are from the MN team (with multiple reviews per volume), and the Planete BD reviews are split into two parts, "L'histoire" (the story) and "Ce qu'on en pense sur la planète BD" (what we think at Planet BD) While I cannot speak French, putting the pages through Google translate does seem to confirm that these are reviews and not just plot summaries. For whatever reason ANN has not picked up the series: most likely because it hasn't charted and because they are limited to translating news about the most popular/NA-licensed manga due to resource constraints. Opencooper (talk) 19:53, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:18, 18 February 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar  06:24, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Generally I take European licenses to be good indications of notability. France and Italy arguably have better historical publishing of manga and anime than the combined US and UK markets and I'm usually inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt for ongoing and longer works. In this case there is enough to go on.SephyTheThird (talk) 12:05, 26 February 2017 (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.