Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Honebuto Hoshin


 * 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.  Sandstein  10:20, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Honebuto Hoshin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Looks like an attempt to translate the ja:WP article ja:骨太の方針 (honebuto-no-hōshin), for some reason changing the Japanese title. Unless 'honebuto hoshin' is actually in use in English, the title should be something understandable, like "Foundation policy" or whatever. Imaginatorium (talk) 12:44, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Imaginatorium (talk) 12:45, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * keep. Cleanup. Link from other Japanese internal politics article, to ensure visibility and hence cleanup Poor choice of title is not the reason for deletion. -M.Altenmann >t 19:30, 24 December 2014 (UTC)


 * English options include "Basic Policies for Economic and Fiscal Management and Structural Reform" (per Tokyo Metropolitan Government, here), "Basic Policies" (from Tomohiko Shinoda's Contemporary Japanese Politics: Institutional Changes and Power Shifts here), or "Robust Policy," closer to a literal translation, which is found in Glen Hook's book Contested Governance in Japan: Sites and Issues. This is also evidence that there is coverage in English establishing notability, so keep. Dekimasu よ! 20:49, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Yes, I see these points. But 骨太の方針 is not a topic, it is a slogan, and WP is not a dictionary. It would be appropriate to mention the slogan somewhere in the article on recent Japanese government policy. I feel that there are vastly too many articles in en:WP which are simply listings of foreign (Japanese in particular). Also, the English of the article is so bad that it would generally be easier to start again. Imaginatorium (talk) 03:20, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * why you decided it is a slogan? even it were, there are wp articles on slogans; we have a full Category:Slogans of them. Also, English is never a reason for deletion. Not to say that the article is quite informative. -M.Altenmann >t 04:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep – The English is not that great. But I copy edited one paragraph, and although it's still not great it only took about 10 minutes. It shouldn't take that long to do the rest. About the topic, whatever it may have meant originally, by now I think it's just the customary name for the policy adopted by the Council on Economic and Fiscal Policy, namely the LDP's official policy. It doesn't matter that much what we call it. If there are problems with the article name we can discuss it on the Talk page. – Margin1522 (talk) 06:39, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:16, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:16, 25 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Reads like an essay, possibly part of the ongoing Kyoto University class assignment, and it is still not clear to me what the article is actually trying to explain. --DAJF (talk) 01:09, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment – I think it's trying to explain the term. People who read the news in Japanese see this a lot and many will probably wonder what the heck is a "thick-boned policy"? Takenaka, who was Koizumi's chief policy adviser, recently wrote this explanation, which I have added to ja:骨太の方針. Amid the ongoing struggle between politicians and bureaucrats for control of the budget, this is the policy statement of the politicians' side. Understanding this helps make sense of the news. – Margin1522 (talk) 02:39, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment Exactly, it's an attempt to explain a Japanese term, which is helpful to Japanese readers. But WP is not Wiktionary, and WP is here to describe topics, such as "Japanese government financial policy", not buzzwords. If there is "valuable political information" here, it belongs somewhere else -- in fact the first "History" paragraph (which perhaps you copy-edited) makes it clear that the real topic here is the CEFP, who are the people who use the buzzword. Imaginatorium (talk) 04:48, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment – That's a point. The name is pretty incomprehensible. Chapter 3 of the book that I added to References is good on the CEFP and Koizumi's "big-boned reform agenda", as the author calls it. For copyright reasons I linked to the JSTOR version, but there's an online version of chapter 3 here. That could be a topic, as opposed to just a term. – Margin1522 (talk) 08:55, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep A poor title leaves the non-Japanese reader at a loss, but there is valuable political information here. A need for copy editing is not a justification for deletion.--DThomsen8 (talk) 04:15, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep Needs cleanup, but as others have noted, that is not a reason for deletion. -AuthorAuthor (talk) 13:16, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep: Needs a cleanup, not outright deletion. -- benlisquare T•C•E 04:09, 30 December 2014 (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.