Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kerokero Ace


 * 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 a non-admin keep per consensus. SorryGuy Talk  02:22, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Kerokero Ace

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete or Merge with an appropriate one. An unreferenced and promotional article (see Free gifts section) on a magazine that fails at WP:NOTE. -- Niaz   (Talk •   Contribs)  13:21, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. This article is in no way intended as promotion. I created it only this morning and it's marked as a stub to help build it up. http://www.kadokawa.co.jp/mag/kerokero/ The magazine is up to its third volume and has taken on some of the titles previously running in the now canceled Comic Bom Bom. The mention of the cover mounted freebies is there because it's a fact of the magazine and my Japanese skills aren't the best so I can't offer tons of information.--HellCat86 (talk) 18:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Unreferenced article (only link is its official site in Japanese) written in an advertising tone. -- Niaz   (Talk •   Contribs)  19:29, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It's difficult not to when the publication in question is highly commercialised. As for references...you've not even given anyone a full day yet. It's a bit ridiculous to demand criteria be met instantly.--HellCat86 (talk) 20:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Article has only been in existence for 2 days. Lack of sources is grounds for improvement, not deletion. Frankly don't see why nominator thinks it has a promotional tone, it notable lacks the superlatives and POV such articles are full of. Edward321 (talk) 06:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. While it is a new magazine, it is published by a well-known and well-established publisher, and the magazine article has only been around for a few days. Articles really shouldn't be nominated for deletion so soon unless they are obviously nonsense. You really need to give the authors a chance to improve it by first marking it with appropriate cleanup tags, allowing a few weeks to a few months for the cleanup to be accomplished (perhaps even notifying the appropriate Wikiproject, too, to allow more interested editors to work on it), and then marking it for deletion if it still doesn't meet the basic requirements of WP:N and WP:V. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. — ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:00, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is tempting to say that on the basis of being nominated 50 minutes after the article was created while the editor was actively working on it, as shown by the history, because per policy, articles aren't supposed to be perfect right off. As mentioned above, if you have notability concerns tag it first, then see what comes of it -- and this goes double if it's still being created. However, edits made since then are enough to convince me that there is sufficient notability to make this a valid stub. — Quasirandom (talk) 23:53, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per aboves. No warning bells go off for me, and it seems to be a valid magazine. --Gwern (contribs) 01:50 6 February 2008 (GMT)
 * Keep. Seems like a perfectly fine article on a proper magazine.  Seems pretty factual to me, with no real "promotional" aspect.  Does however need one or two references, e.g. a reference for examples of free gifts would help in the removal of any "promotional" aspect. Highwind888 (talk) 02:21, 6 February 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.