Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Genkou youshi


 * 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 no consensus, if you wish to pursue a transwiki further feel free to try on the talk page. Daniel (talk) 03:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Genkou youshi

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete This is a dictionary article, I suggest transwiking WP:NOT Ļıßζېấשּׂ~ۘ Ώƒ ﻚĢęخ (talk) 01:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Wryspy (talk) 02:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.   cab (talk) 03:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment No opinion yet. There's a couple of paragraphs in English in Sources probably exist in Japanese but they will be hard to find among the hundreds of thousands of GHits for retailers and every single magazine, government bureau, and school essay contest saying "please submit drafts on genkou youshi" . I note with surprise that we lack an article on binder paper (yes, yes, WP:OTHERCRAPDOESNTEXIST). cab (talk) 03:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Loose leaf? —Quasirandom (talk) 04:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ah thanks, good find. Redirected. cab (talk) 06:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)


 * keep I see no difference between this and all the other articles on paper in Category:Paper. They are legitimate encyclopedia articles; so is this.  Hmains (talk) 03:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Or more specifically, little difference between this and other stubs in Category:Paper. I'm not clear what makes this intrisically unlikely to grow beyond a dictionary definition, because per policy it's the potential not current stubbiness that matters -- I'm hoping the nominator can expand a little on that. (Obligatory Irrelevancy: Oh so that's what the stuff's called.) —Quasirandom (talk) 03:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment This is a kind of stationery, so I recategorized it. It's now in Category:Stationery. Fg2 (talk) 03:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as there are apparently several sources and a decent start on an article. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 04:59, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Question. Is this paper also used widely in China, Korea, etc., or is this a uniquely Japanese phenomenom? In either case I'd like to keep, but if the former, it should probably incorporate those countries usage and have a title that covers all three (perhaps grid paper?) Mostlyharmless (talk) 07:30, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I've been told that this paper is also used in Korea (however, this is word of mouth, I have no cites yet, and no info on China). I suggest renaming to character paper, or grid paper, or whatever the common non-neoligism term is, which would give scope for including non-Japanese uses. Mostlyharmless (talk) 01:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep .Keep and rename. This references a thing, rather than a concept, which is verifiable, referenceable, and notable through its use by millions daily. Contra Librarianofages, this isn't a dictionary entry. A stub maybe, but certainly has scope for growth. Mostlyharmless (talk) 07:30, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment See how it looks.    You cannot graduate schools in Japan without using it. Oda Mari (talk) 17:02, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak delete, I know what this stuff is but is there really enough that can be said about it to warrant a article? Is there not a general article on types of paper that it can be merged into? The Japanese article is rather big though...If someone could translate that (I don't have the time or interest) then perhaps there would be more of a case for keep.--Him and a dog 12:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Very, VERY weak keep. I don't think there should be entries for loose leaf or library paste or correction tape, but they're there and someone thought it was a good idea to keep them. On another track, this is another example of Japanophilia in the English Wiki, but unless it can be redirected into a more general, more worldwide article (i.e. someone a while back thought language education and gogaku, the Japanese word for it, should be separate articles), it should unfortunately stay where it is. --Roehl Sybing (talk) 18:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
 * transwiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.82.139.5 (talk) 12:17, 23 January 2008 (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.