Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gogyōshi


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:22, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Gogyōshi

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Notability is highly dubious. Gbooks finds nothing. Gwebsearch results are confined to user-generated matter (Google Groups etc). Gogyōshi appears to be a breakaway form of Gogyōka (whose notability itself has been the subject of debate). Of the 5 references, 4 are to blogs or self-published books (Lulu). The 2 ELs are to blogs. The wp:fr and wp:ja articles are nearly identical to this one. gråb whåt you cån (talk) 12:45, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:50, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. This article is about an (alleged) Japanese verse form. - Smerdis of Tlön - killing the human spirit since 2003! 15:50, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:20, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:48, 8 March 2012 (UTC)



I believe establishing the legitimacy of gogyoshi as an authentic - if nascent - Japanese poetic form may be possible via reference to a series of essays (with cited sources) written by Aizu Taro in the summer of 2011. In these essays, Mr. Aizu traces the history and development of a native five-line, non-tanka poem originating in late Japanese folk-song and continuing up to the present day. These texts remain untranslated at present but the Japanese originals may be accessed through the archives at Mr. Aizu's blog 'The Lovely Earth' (http://blogs.yahoo.co.jp/lovelyearth_mont).

The growing use of the word 'gogyoshi' to define their work by poets writing five-line free verse in North America and Europe as well as in Japan, may signal a trend. It could prove indicative of a grassroots acceptance and adoption of the form as it continues to be used and developed by international practitioners. A cursory review of poetic 'tags' at 'Twitter' alone will give some idea of the ubiquity of the term's use among contemporary short-form poets. I would urge a period of further waiting and watching regarding gogyoshi's development (if any) prior to deletion of its entry by Wikipedia. Brian Zimmer OMZ57 (talk) 17:28, 8 March 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by OMZ57 (talk • contribs) 
 * Comment - OMZ57 asserts simultaneously that gogyoshi is (1) a nascent poetic form, and (2) that its origins can be traced to Japanese folk-song. Whatever about this contradiction, his assertions are based exclusively on blog postings by an author who has himself failed the test of notability (see Articles for deletion/Taro Aizu). The second part of OMZ57's comment relates to user-generated content on Twitter referring to itself as 'gogyoshi'. All of the above appears to be fail in terms of establishing notability per WP guidelines. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 00:49, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Wifione  Message 07:58, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

 Bagworm, as you added a quotation mark " " to Japanese word 五行詩, the number of the search has greatly reduced. If you delete the mark " " from 　五行詩 and search it by Yahoo!Japan, you will see that the number of the search will be more than you pointed out. The number changes every day. At least it shows 700,000～2,500,000. Please click the following URL! This. http://search.yahoo.co.jp/search?p=%E4%BA%94%E8%A1%8C%E8%A9%A9&search.x=1&fr=top_ga1_sa&tid=top_ga1_sa&ei=UTF-8&aq=&oq= Moreover, the search number of 五行歌 in Yahoo!Japan is http://search.yahoo.co.jp/search?p=%E4%BA%94%E8%A1%8C%E6%AD%8C&aq=-1&oq=&ei=UTF-8&fr=top_ga1_sa&x=wrt Besides, the search number of 会津太郎（Aizu　Taro）is http://search.yahoo.co.jp/search?p=%E4%BC%9A%E6%B4%A5%E5%A4%AA%E9%83%8E&aq=-1&oq=&ei=UTF-8&fr=top_ga1_sa&x=wrt The notability of them are very evident in Yahoo!Japan. As a conclusion, we can hope we will have their developements in English speaking countries.--Rappelle-toi (talk) 03:26, 17 March 2012 (UTC) "To search for an exact phrase, put quotation marks around two or more words. For example, a search for 'to be or not to be' returns only results containing the exact phrase inside the quotation marks." Therefore, (by comparison) this search for "five line poem" (with " ") finds 664, all being occurrences of the exact phrase. By comparison, this search (omitting " ") yields an impressive 854,000 results, but the vast majority do not contain the exact phrase "five line poem". --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 10:13, 17 March 2012 (UTC) "五行詩”（gogyohshi)　isn't "five line poem" in English but "五行詩” in Japanese.--Rappelle-toi (talk) 13:51, 17 March 2012 (UTC) Japanese people don't use a quotation mark generally, so the number of search using a quotation is reduced greatly but the number of search not using quotation is not reduced, but the real number in Japan. --Rappelle-toi (talk) 17:27, 17 March 2012 (UTC) According to Google Japan,　the search number of 五行詩 is about 2,500,000 as follows: https://www.google.co.jp/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=f&oq=%E4%BA%94%E8%A1%8C%E8%A9%A9&hl=ja&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4GWYH_jaJP308JP320&q=%E4%BA%94%E8%A1%8C%E8%A9%A9&gs_upl=0l0l0l4329lllllllllll0&aqi=g1s2 the search number of 五行歌 is about 800,000: https://www.google.co.jp/search?sourceid=navclient&hl=ja&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADRA_jaJP337JP337&q=%E4%BA%94%E8%A1%8C%E6%AD%8C In addition, the search number of 会津太郎 is about 1,800,000: https://www.google.co.jp/search?sourceid=navclient&hl=ja&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADRA_jaJP337JP337&q=%E4%BC%9A%E6%B4%A5%E5%A4%AA%E9%83%8E Bagworm, do you understand Japanese? Please grab what you can!--Rappelle-toi (talk) 02:55, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Further comment - I've looked harder at the article and found the following. Since nomination on March 1, a number of blogs have been added to the External links and Notes sections. In addition to those blogs, reference has been added to a single English-language publication, Atlas Poetica, whose articles relate largely to a single non-notable (see above) gogyoshi poet, Taro Aizu. Further additions include a link to the personal website of Mariko Sumikura, and to three of her books self-published at Chikurinkan. Additionally, an editor of Atlas Poetica has added a second paragraph to the article, which is at core unreferenced (though he includes one peripheral reference to his own magazine). In summary, these last attempts to make the topic look notable are merely smoke and mirrors. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 10:51, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment　-　The number of search of "五行詩（Gogyohshi)" at Yahoo! Japan on March 16,2012 is,"　2,510,000”.　The number of search of "Gogyohshi" is "6,530".　That of "Gogyohshi" at Google is "209". "Gogyohshi" has the great notability in Japan but doesn't have enough notability in English -speaking countries yet. As a conclusion, we can expect the developement of "Gogyohshi" in the future English-speaking countries.--Rappelle-toi (talk) 01:18, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Yahoo! Japan search for "五行詩" shows me just 136,000 not 2.5 million as claimed above: http://search.yahoo.co.jp/search?p=%22%E4%BA%94%E8%A1%8C%E8%A9%A9%22 --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 10:57, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment
 * Comment First of all, notability in WP terms is not established by number of results from a web search - please see Notability. Secondly, you appear to have misunderstood how Yahoo search works. Per http://help.yahoo.com/kb/index?page=content&y=PROD_SRCH&locale=en_US&id=SLN2242&impressions=false
 * Yes, I know. It's simply an illustration of how omitting "quotation marks" distorts the result. To obtain an accurate count, you must include the " ". --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 15:27, 17 March 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.