Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Saint Seiya Chapters


 * 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. This is not an uncontroversial decision, so I'll give a lot of reasoning for it; consensus in this case is based on examining arguments for their validity and considering the remaining valid arguments. Arguments for deletion below revolve around a) low interest among general public, b) the list being indiscriminate, c) the list not being encyclopedic and d) the list being undeveloped. A) The manga might be of low interest in the United States (and perhaps the West), but Wikipedia is a global resource and the works are of sufficient interest in certain parts of the world to refute the 'lack of interest' argument. B) The list has a defined scope and specific inclusion criteria; therefore, it is not indiscriminate. C) The main article exists and references this list; inclusion of the list in the main article would make it's length unwieldy ... therefore, style guidelines support the creation of a standalone article containing the list. D) The template Expand list should be added as a hatnote. One repeated 'keep' related argument in particular is not valid: The article is young => An article can be deleted 1 minute after creation if deletion if consistent with standing policy. In addition, any argument based on 'other Manga have them, therefore this one should' is on the face invalid in relation to 'wp:otherstuffexists'. Finally, if the focus of the article should be volumes rather than chapters, that is a content issue that has no bearing on whether or not the article should be deleted. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 02:03, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

List of Saint Seiya Chapters

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This is not an encyclopedia article. I'm not really sure what it is, other than listcruft. Corvus cornix 23:39, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm not sure what it is about either, but I think they call it fancruft.  Useight 23:59, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete While Saint Seiya may merit a Wikipedia article, I'm not sure that this particular presentation of information is appropriate. A list of the Manga Volumes is somewhat reasonable, the chapters within them?  A bit much in the way of information.  FrozenPurpleCube 00:56, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletions.   -- Ned Scott 07:13, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. The article's been here for 36 hours, and it's already up for deletion? Talk about unreasonable. I don't think listing chapters is too much information. Every other manga list does the same, and they're still here. See List of Bleach chapters, List of Naruto chapters and List of One Piece chapters. Think of "chapters" as "TV episodes" and "volumes" as "TV seasons." Like this. Episode lists even include plot summaries for each and every episode, and no one calls them "cruft." What I'm saying is, give the article a chance.--Nohansen 20:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * There's nothing unreasonable about noticing an article and acting on it quickly. There is a reason why AFD is a five-day process.  Same with other referring to other articles.   List of Bleach chapters was the subject of a deletion discussion, which closed as no-consensus, but I doubt anybody was convincing on either side.  And the difference with the Sopranos is that episodes are more distinct works.  I'd have no objection to a list of Saint Seiya Volumes, but this would be like having a list of Sopranos scenes.    FrozenPurpleCube 21:35, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW, List of InuYasha chapters is the best example of a way to do this, if that's your intent then I wouldn't object to an article like that. FrozenPurpleCube 03:02, 18 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep but possibly rename and re-focus for volumes instead of chapters. -- Ned Scott 03:52, 18 June 2007(UTC)
 * Keep individual manga chapters are usually serialized in one of the weekly/monthly anthologies, so they do sometimes appear as stand-alone work within the anthology. But I agree with Scott: Chapters are relevent, but this needs to focus on the manga volumes unless it is taken out of the graphic novel's context (i.e. provide publishing dates for chapters when they were published in the Shounen Jump). Also, Saint Seiya is not an obscure series, was an extremely popular internationally in the late eighties/early nineties. - Mizi 18:21, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, totally equivalent to episode listings, and useful for all the same reasons. It needs formatted by volume though. Also, lol at calling Saint Seiya obscure. --tjstrf talk 06:14, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, I think you should give a new article a while to develop. If it unreasonably violated WP:NOT then why wasn't it speedily deleted?--Squilibob 08:16, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Just so you know, violating WP:NOT is not a speedy deletion criteria. --tjstrf talk 18:02, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Really people... --tjstrf talk 03:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I would argue against the statement that every other major notable manga has one of these by pointing at WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Just because other manga have them doesn't mean that every manga ever needs to have one of these. For huge, incredibly popular ones (such as InuYasha), the need is there. Here, though, it seems like just a random collection of information. I agree with Mister Manticore, in that if this were to become more like List of InuYasha chapters, I would support keeping it. As of now, though, it seems as though it violates WP:NOT. This is just a list of chapters that doesn't seem to provide any encyclopedic value. bwowen talk .contribs 03:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply Why hello there, systemic bias! Saint Seiya has something like 4 ongoing spin-off manga series, merchandise, and OVA series still in production 17 years after the original ceased publication. It never made it big in the US, but Saint Seiya is a "huge, incredibly popular" manga series. In fact, we use it as the canonical example of a shonen series on the shōnen article.
 * Reply Thank you for the information. I was unaware of the popularity that this manga enjoys outside of America, as an American. My delete stands due to my feelings on WP:NOT. bwowen talk .contribs 03:55, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep or Userfy Right now, it's too early to tell if this list will present information in a useful and coherent manner. It is in an undeveloped state and it is impossible to apply any provision of WP:NOT, especially WP:NOT. --Farix (Talk) 22:50, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Unencyclopedic fancruft. Why does this need its own article? Can't this be a subsection of the series' main article or something? --Potato dude42 21:47, 22 June 2007 (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.