Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kirepapa


 * 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. Split !votes, but policy heavily favored those arguing delete. As always, I will be happy to userify this article for further improvement, and possible restoration if reliable sources showing notability appears. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  03:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Kirepapa
Discussion to run until at least 9 February 2009 (UTC)


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

Non-notable manga by an author who is also non-notable. The work has received very little coverage from reliable third-party sources and trivial mention of the English language license. Although it was adapted into a direct-to-video anime, there is no indication that the anime ever received notice by reliable third-party sources either. See WT:ANIME for more details about the WikiProject's Aurora Publishing review. Farix (Talk) 00:51, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the redlinked Ryô Takagi in hopes it will be developed. Author is probably notable per gsearch. JJL (talk) 01:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Basic common sense should dictate that companies do not go through the trouble and great expense to produce TWO OVAs and THREE drama CDs of a "non-notable" manga. 159.182.1.4 (talk) 13:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Only one OVA and audio drama series. However, Wikipedia bases notability on if the subject has received significant coverage by independent reliable sources. Simply being adapted into other media itself doesn't mean the manga is notable. Even WP:BK doesn't cross that bridge. --Farix (Talk) 16:08, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep for being a manga AND an anime. Common sense over current rules for English language wikipedia. Dream Focus (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The subtle part was that OVA doesn't count. Anime adaptation with national broadcast does. Movie adaptation does. KrebMarkt 18:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:BK; unnotable manga series by an unnotable author. A single short unnotable OVA adaptation nor a series of equally unnotable drama CDs are relatively irrelevant. The series has not received any significant coverage anywhere, the author is not notable, even its original publisher isn't notable, with only a handful of titles in its stable. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 19:05, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Pending finding multiple reviews or other notice of the manga, its notability depends on the adaptations. Quoting WP:BK C3: The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to a notable motion picture, or other art form, or event or political or religious movement. That is, the OVA and drama CDs would have to be notable as well, and so far no reliable notice of them has been found. That they exist is an indicator of notability, but does not demonstrate it to the letter of our guidelines. Delete as failing WP:BK. —Quasirandom (talk) 04:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Releases date of the Drama CDs aren't sourced. I found that Kirepapa CD ? and that Kirepapa CD2 ?. Not enough to assert notability. KrebMarkt 11:56, 5 February 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.