Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/MOON-kana-


 * 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The result was   Slow keep Withdrawn two weeks ago and nobody noticed. NAC. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:12, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

MOON-kana-

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

non-notable singer. A Google search for "moon-kana" does not return any reliable sources, and I haven't been able to find any evidence that she meets any of the other criteria, such as having a record certified gold or higher or having an international tour covered by a reliable source (the latter can be more or less proven using Google News. Unscented (talk) 20:52, 2 June 2009 (UTC) Now that we've found some evidence of notability, I withdraw my recommendation to delete. I'm not going to close the debate myself, though, because it appears that the page may require a history merge with Kana (Japanese musician), which only an administrator can perform.--Unscented (talk) 16:36, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  --  I 'mperator 21:07, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * "considered for deletion"? MOON-kana- was simply moved from the original page to reflect her name change. The other article (Kana (Japanese musician) ) has been around for quite a while. She's anything but non-noteworthy. Not having a gold album does not mean that she should not have a wikipedia page devoted to her. Apart from being a singer she is also a model and a desinger. She has a massive following in Japan and a large following in the US and Europe. She has over 20,000 fans on her myspace page and tours fairly often. If "Survivor" contestants get their own pages for doing little more than appearing on a television show, Kana certainly deserves a page here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.46.108 (talk) 23:08, 2 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.  —Fg2 (talk) 11:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. How does any search in the Latin alphabet "more or less prove" unnotability for a Japanese subject? Phil Bridger (talk) 19:59, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment: Certified gold isn't required by WP:MUSIC -- the simple expedient of having two albums on a major label or one of the more important indies suffices, or even having charted once. I see several albums (and one even has its own article) but cannot determine the label(s) they were released under. Can anyone with mad Nihongo skillz give an assist here? —Quasirandom (talk) 14:14, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I was only using the certified gold criterion as an example - I haven't been able to find evidence that she meets any of the criteria. If anyone knows of any evidence, it would be greatly appreciated.--Unscented (talk) 19:12, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment: I'm neutral on the notability issue because my Japanese skills are insufficient to seek out reliable references. However, a history merge could be unnecessary. Except for the addition of this AfD and the incorrectly done move, neither MOON-kana- nor Kana (Japanese musician) have undergone any edits to their content. If MOON-kana- was to be speedily deleted, I think Kana (Japanese musician) could be moved correctly with no impact to the licensing requirements (though I would be happy to be corrected on this point). Astronaut (talk) 14:12, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: If it is kept, the article will need a history merge with Kana (Japanese musician), as it appears to have been created using a copy-paste move. --DAJF (talk) 14:51, 3 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - I note that there are an unusually large number of other language wikipedia articles for a nomination on notability grounds. In particular, the French, Spanish, and German articles have information not in ours (particularly about the European tours) and can be presumed to have been created independently, and not translated. This very strongly suggests there's international coverage of this musician, which would satisfy either C1 or C4 of WP:MUSIC. I also note that GNews searches for the international tour should be made under Kana, not MOON Kana, as that was the name she was using at the time. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:48, 4 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I've redone the search, using the terms "kana singer tour" (without quotes) - there are results, but none of them are relevant to the article's subject.--Unscented (talk) 19:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - sounds to me like you just want to delete the article no matter what you find. Have you tried typing in kanji? And why is "google" the deciding factor here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.181.238.123 (talk) 21:12, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
 * That's not the case at all - I certainly don't want the article deleted if anyone can find any evidence that its subject is notable. The problem is, we haven't found any. I can't type in Kanji, because like most people, I only have an English keyboard, and like most English Wikipedia editors, I don't speak Japanese. If you can do a Kanji search, please do so - it could very well turn up some notability evidence that we've all been missing. And remember to assume good faith.--Unscented (talk) 21:23, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 21:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Only 5600 hits on Google in Japanese and no Google news hits. Nothing in Japanese that shows evidence of notability or a massive following in Japan. Anecdotally, I've never heard of her after several years in Japan. Does not pass WP:NM as far as I can tell. Dekimasu よ! 12:34, 7 June 2009 (UTC) Searches that use "Kana" without the "Moon" part yield more results. Dekimasu よ! 10:05, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * It looks like the releases are all self-released, so no easy way on to WP:MUSIC by label. Pending any reliable third-party reviews of either her music or her touring, which I could not find in German or English, it's a delete . —Quasirandom (talk) 02:02, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Turns out the "self-released" part of the article was ambiguously worded. Only the newer albums were self-released, the rest were released under the Teichiku Records label. Found out via a quick search on Amazon JP.   —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.241.169.203 (talk) 09:22, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for finding that that. Teichiku Records looks to counts as a major label for WP:MUSIC purposes, which means she definitively passes that notability guideline. Changing my !vote to keep. —Quasirandom (talk) 01:11, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  I 'mperator 21:41, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. If this is kept, it should be moved to Kana (singer) to conform to WP:MOS-TM, WP:MOS-JP, the name she actually markets herself under, and the name of her article on the Japanese Wikipedia. Dekimasu よ! 10:04, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Kana is apparently the name she formerly marketed herself under, with this being the current name. —Quasirandom (talk) 15:03, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, that may be so; let me rephrase. Per the evidence I previously struck out above, the name that gets a respectable number of hits and can be sourced sufficiently is the one that she has been marketed under until now, which makes the common name for her "Kana". Dekimasu よ! 00:16, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * You're right -- WP:COMMONAME would seem to rule here, requiring a move (including merging both relevant article histories) to Kana (singer). —Quasirandom (talk) 02:55, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Still, it's "Moon Kana" now, not "Kana". Why is the article at "Kana (singer)"?76.181.44.154 (talk) 16:39, 19 June 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.