Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deai-kei


 * 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. Nja 247 08:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Deai-kei

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Entry consists of one Japanese word and two uses for it in Japan. Not sure why it should be in English Wikipedia, but it is. SpacemanSpiff (talk) 00:33, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Expand if possible; delete if not, or merge into some article about dating/sex/prostitution in Japan. Japan has so many crazy dating phenomena like love hotels, compensated dating, etc that I can't imagine there wouldn't be a place for this somewhere on Wikipedia. Lesath2 (talk) 02:28, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: This Google Books entry and this one indicate that this is a notable topic. Cunard (talk) 06:14, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Reply to SpacemanSpiff: The article should stay in Wikipedia because a whole chapter in a 2003 Routledge book is devoted to the topic (reffed in article at time of creation) and because of the additional ref located by Cunard. More refs can probably be found. Notable concept. Power.corrupts (talk) 08:40, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand. It's sourced and is quite likely something that can be better sourced. I'll look for sources this evening. Just because it's a Japanese word and subculture doesn't mean it doesn't belong in the English Wikipedia, notability crosses international boundaries. Kate (talk) 20:26, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.  —Fg2 (talk) 10:59, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Sources already present show that the subject of this stub (and oh is this a stub) is of academic interest in English, which means there has to be a lot more available in Japanese. That this has not been added is irrelevant, as per policy it doesn't have been perfect, it just has to have potential. If a subjecthas been noted, it's notable, and so keep. —Quasirandom (talk) 15:27, 25 May 2009 (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.