Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Get Love!! Field no Ōji Sama


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 23:58, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Get Love!! Field no Ōji Sama

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

Unnotable manga series; fails WP:BK. No significant coverage in reliable, third party sources, no extensive reviews, no awards, nothing. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 12:40, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. -- --  Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 12:42, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment The plot summary was an exact copy of ANN's summary, thus a copyvio and has been removed. --Farix (Talk) 12:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The author is notable so I think her manga should have an article (it would probably need clean up if it stays though). Laurent (talk) 21:23, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment While I have yet to do my own evaluation of the subject yet, being written by a notable author is not among the criteria for inclusion (WP:NOTE, WP:BK). Only the works of a historically significant writers, such as Osamu Tezuka, are given such blanket assertions. --Farix (Talk) 22:43, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I guess that's true, but they at least deserve a merge to an author article. Otherwise the guidelines stop us from covering these authors comprehensively. To write about an author properly, you can't avoid discussing their work. The only point of contention is really whether it should have a separate article or not. - Mgm|(talk) 09:45, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Per guidelines, in an author biography, works are primarily just briefly listed with release date and title, not plot summary. This is already included in her article, so it would be a redirec over a merge. I'd also really question just how "notable" Ikeyamada is. No significant works thus far, none ever licensed, only two with articles both of which are now up for deletion, and no significant coverage on her at all (none at all really). -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 15:09, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Well she obviously doesn't have the notability of Osamu Tezuka but, on Anime Network, one of her manga appeared twice in the top 10 and once at the 13th position in the Japanese Comic Ranking: 1 2 3. Additionally, the article is not just about one manga but a series of 7 volumes that have been released over two years so it can potentially be expanded and improved. Laurent (talk) 21:21, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Sale ranks has already been rejected by WP:BK a few weeks ago. But also, that is a different manga series. The notability of one manga series does not transfer to all other manga series by the same author. But I didn't cite Osamu Tezuka just for his notability. I cited him because if his historical influences on both anime and manga. --Farix (Talk) 21:37, 18 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Seem to received very little buzz at all. Definitely no reliable sources. In fact, the number of GHits are not impressive at all. --Farix (Talk) 02:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. 4,760 hits for "フィールドの王子さま" seems impressive enough to me.  This is clearly a notable manga, from a notable creator, who has published several at least seven volumes in books and DVD comic collections formats.   D r e a m Focus  14:09, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment 4,000? I only came up with just over 1,000 under the Kanji name. That's nothing. Even removing the two exclamation marks didn't increase the number of GHits. But the number of GHits is meaningless unless they come up with significant coverage by reliable sources. --Farix (Talk) 02:59, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Keep in mind that Google hits do not demonstrate notability. -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 22:36, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Question Can someone who speaks Japanese look at the Japanese wikipedia? I think there is a translation error using Google.   It says that the 5th book "Premium Edition (Digital Comic Memorial topped 100 million copies with a DVD)".  I don't think it would've sold a 100 million copies.   D r e a m Focus  14:15, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've noticed this too, but whatever it says there's no source for it so we can't use it. I've also searched for "million" and "get love" in Japanese on Google but couldn't find anything. Somebody with some knowledge of Japanese could probably help here. Laurent (talk) 14:54, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Not taking any position here but i can answer the number issue. The number is in tens thousand unit (10K) google can translate but can't do unit conversion. --KrebMarkt 17:48, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Babelfish translates it as: "The sale broke 1,500,000 section at 7th volume sale point in time" -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 22:44, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 09:06, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:BK and WP:N. There's no reliable sources showing how it is notable in the real world.  The article is nothing but a card catalog directory.  Them  From  Space  16:11, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: trivial 3rd party coverage. Non-notable. JamesBurns (talk) 07:06, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete barely any 3rd party coverage, nothing that would demonstrate that it is notable per WP:BK or WP:N. -- Kraftlos  (Talk | Contrib) 22:39, 26 March 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.