Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/KissAnime


 * 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. Vanamonde (Talk) 05:01, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

KissAnime

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

None of the references are significant coverage to a reliable source. Nothing notable about a pirate site, there plenty more like it. One goes down, others go up, just as many have done before it.  D r e a m Focus  02:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions.  Megan Barris   (Lets talk📧)  02:11, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.  Megan Barris   (Lets talk📧)  02:11, 17 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. All the sources are in-depth and I think all are reliable. TorrentFreak cited in the article is a reliable source and it has covered that site several times. Another reliable outlet covering this is AnimeNewsNetwork: . Other coverage is from more niche outlets (as in, platforms not having their own articles on Wikipedia) but there are new stories appearing all the time, for example, , since the closure is recent news), but even if they are niche they are not blogs, and the coverage is clearly independent and relatively in-depth. The current article cites only English language sources, but the site's closure has been covered in other languages as well in a similar fashion, ex Polish, Italian, German, Spanish. Here's a passing mention of the site in a book (yes, passing, I am not saying it adds much, but still): . I am not sure when the bot will add that info to the article, but Alexa suggests the site was almost in Top 500 most popular websites in the world (530 from what I see right now?), and this also a useful indicator. Whether the site was notable before it's closure, I am unsure, but the coverage from the last few days surely pushes it into the notable zone. PS. I'll ping User:Goroth who just created de:KissAnime which seems even longer and better referenced than the article we have here (which, disclaimer, I wrote). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:02, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * All I'm seeing is just brief mentions that its shut down. Just routine news coverage for one event.   D r e a m Focus  03:40, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The mentions are not brief - most go for dozens of paragraphs, and cover various related topics, such as reasons for the shutdown, aftermath for related sites, fan reactions, as well as history of the site. It clearly was a major website (Top 500 most visited in the world for several years) and a cultural phenomena (it had/has its own subreddit: ). And while it is more difficult (at least, for me) to find older news coverage, here's a piece about the site from 2017: . This site clearly passes WP:Notability (websites), WP:WEBCRIT section: it "has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself." --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  03:54, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That's not really significant coverage, it just covering the lawsuit filed against them in 2017. There is nothing about this website different than all the others like it. Its was "in the top 250 most visited websites in the United States".  How many similar sites were also in there?  They don't write anything on their site, they don't do anything at all but host illegal copies of anime.  They are not significant in any possible way.  People will now just go to one of the identical sites that have the exact same stolen content.   D r e a m Focus  04:03, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * We clearly differ on what means 'siginficant coverage' and 'notable'. The story of the site's closure is discussed in dozen+ independent newspapers, and another cited news piece discusses an event from 2017 (so it is more than just NOTNEWS, enduring coverage of 2+ events has been shown) and you think it is not enough, and then you just voted keep at an article with an unreferenced list... (Articles for deletion/List of Japanese board games) simply because some of the entries are blue-linked. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:06, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Claiming several times over than something isn't "significant coverage" doesn't make it true, those articles don't seem like "short mentions" to me. Your statements in this AFD that there is "nothing notable about a pirate site" and "that there are plenty more like it" makes me feel like you might have some bias on this, pretty much anything can be notable, there are tons of news websites out there that only operate for a short time (KissAnime was around for about a decade), that doesn't make the notable news websites less notable. This pirate website has gotten tons of coverage, and that's undeniable in my opinion.★Trekker (talk) 20:12, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * They were "around for about a decade" and the only coverage they get is when they get shut down? Or a brief mention of their name when they were sued years ago by someone trying to shut them down.  And there is nothing at all about them other than they hosted illegal content, and that's it.  Not much to write an article about.   D r e a m Focus  21:20, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * That is pure POV as far as I see it, not every article needs to be huge, and not being large or not having a broad subject is no reason for deletion when there are tons of sources that bring the subject above GNG. Your arguments seem a lot like IDONTLIKEIT. What else would a pirate website be known for if not getting in trouble with the laws they're breaking?★Trekker (talk) 22:29, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I don't really know what the criteria of notability are in en:WP regarding websites. I just translated that one into German and looked out for some German-languaged sources: So, I found an article which tried to answer the question whether watching anime on KissAnime is illegal or not. Since April of 2017 the EUGH stated that visiting the site and streaming anime is illegal because of copyright infringement. Visitor who used the service where often send on malicious websites. There where mobile apps for android and iOS devices. And there are a bunch of mirror sites which seem to be working. --Goroth (talk) 13:16, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
 * The English criteria are here Notability (websites), but I think this is related to the basic WP:GNG. Since the shutdown, the site has been written about by a bunch of outlets, and this makes it notable. Can you tell us what are the German criteria, why do you think the de wiki article meets them, and whether any coverage in the German sources strikes you as in-depth and reliable? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:20, 19 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep There are tons of sources which cover this website in depth, even beyond the sources already presented above. Here are some https://www.cbr.com/kissanime-is-dead-and-it-deserved-to-die/, https://sea.mashable.com/culture/11971/kissanime-is-dead-and-everyone-is-mourning-its-death-with-memes, https://www.techtimes.com/articles/251827/20200815/breaking-kissanime-and-kissmanga-closed-permanently-heres-why-japan-shuts-down-the-sites.htm .★Trekker (talk) 20:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to... somewhere under Anime but I'm not sure. I'm reviewing the sources and as Dream Focus is saying, until this shutdown, they are all trivial, though outside the body of RSes, "everyone" knew it as an illicit site to get anime. I've searched GNews as well as G Scholar and there are minor hits that do not help notability there, but they do tell me that we should have a section either at Anime or a sub-article on both the legal (eg Crunchyroll) and illegal distribution of anime around the world, and here is where basically a brief summary of KissAnime and the lawsuit and closure can be contained without losing the information. "Globalization" right now is rather light given the number of hits I get when I google-scholar "globalization of anime" and using the free Wikipedia Library Card to see what JStor has , there's a lot more possible hits (but nothing for KissAnime). But basicly, expand something about the globalization of anime more than what Anime covers, and you clearly have a place to talk about sites like KissAnime and their fates, which this can merge into. --M asem  (t) 03:46, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * As you say, until the shutdown, the sources were weak. But now we have plenty, so what you are saying would make sense before, but why do you think the current sources are still insufficient? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm looking at all the sources provided and they are saying all the same effective thing: the site provided illegal anime downloads, it was ordered shutdown, there were a lot of reactions too it, mostly of a "Good riddance" sort. Combined, not significant coverage about the site (who founded it, why they opted to offer material this why or past legal issues, analysis of the legality of what they were doing, etc.) and while you can point to all these articles talking about its closure, they're all saying the same thing so that's not creating new coverage by volume of sources, just that if we are going to talk illegal distribution of anime, KissAnime should be included in such a discussion. --M asem  (t) 05:52, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Since when are there specific info criteria to GNG? The site has coverage, that's all that's needed, unknown creators aren't a problem as far as I see it.★Trekker (talk) 06:34, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Not all sites talk about the same aspects. Good example is that some are discussing the criticism and others are talking about the praise (of sorts) the site got . --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:23, 19 August 2020 (UTC)
 * User commentary and things like twitter posts, memes, etc. are things broadly we generally don't document in depth (users aren't experts like critics) though here obviously noting that the site's closure drew commentary can be mentioned briefly. We want significant coverage per the GNG (not just coverage), because particularly if the site is now closed, there likely will be no more coverage from sources, and if sourcing is all that is there, this is all we can write about this and this is not an appropriate article for WP; it is appropriate for merging into the larger topic of globalization of anime and distribution and most of what is already said in our article can be kept, it just doesn't need a standalone. --M asem (t) 13:22, 19 August 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment. Just saying that each day there is still more coverage. For example, here's the second ANN article on this: Southeast Asia, India Fans Disproportionately Affected by Pirate Site KissAnime Closure. I think it is a good example of follow-up coverage as it seems ANN did an entire survey on this and this focuses on regional differences in what fans think about this. And here's a new (if on the shorter side) article from Gamereactor: --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  06:45, 20 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. The problem is that all of the citations are strictly related to the website's closure, and there is no coverage for its notability beforehand. Does that make the website significant enough to earn an article? Other websites like the Pirate Bay gained larger notoriety and coverage. KissAnime has only notable importance amongst anime communities, so unless it opens a larger discussion about online piracy, it may not have much need of an article. Evilgidgit (talk) 00:08, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * There was one article about it in 2017 so there it is more than just one-event coverage. Not that I am disputing that 99% of the coverage is recent. The site likely wasn't notable in 2017, but I think it is notable now. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:28, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Weak keep: If I am not mistaken the article creator is somewhat known (well at least to me) for PROD'ing and AfD'ing. Without knowning was Anime or Manga is, and the article could probably do with wikilinking them at least, many might be clueless as to the focus of the like.  If I'm not mistaken, Global Alexa rank is 4 million. (I think thats 90 day average and shouldn't have been affected too much by a recent closure) whereas aimeexx.de is about 158,000.  The Categories show we hare having articles for similar Aimee sites.  The fact that its shut down or illegal is no reason to delete, its all part of history and its of interest to know a lifecycle.  The "Weak" is because I'm a little concerned about the influence due to the current low Alexa rank and I dont have history.Djm-leighpark (talk) 09:30, 21 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: The site has received WP:SIGCOV. With reliable sources indicated above, the article easily passes WP:NWEB. ASTIG😎  (ICE T • ICE CUBE) 16:00, 21 August 2020 (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.