Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mariko Aoki phenomenon


 * 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   no consensus. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:18, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Mariko Aoki phenomenon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is very likely original research and lacks reliable sources to support it (at least for now). For now it contains mere speculation of a phenomenon and probably does not merit inclusion in Wikipedia until sufficient coverage on the matter is available. (PS. Somebody take a look at the Japanese version of the article.)Thomas J. S. Greenfield (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * What is the problem with the Japanese article? --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:25, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * See also this discussion. --kelapstick(bainuu) 12:28, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. The phenomenon has received coverage in the major Japanese media as indicated by the sources, so notability appears to be established, and I don't see any evidence of "original research" on the part of editors to the article. --DAJF (talk) 12:43, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. I have no faith that these sources provide reliable, in-depth discussion of the supposed phenomenon. Drmies (talk) 15:10, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. DAJF (talk) 12:43, 13 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Inability to read the source language is a personal issue and has no bearing on the veracity of the sources.
 * The phenomenon is not really about the pseudo-science behind it, but how Japanese media took this nonsense and ran with it. The article has coverage in major news outlets (Asahi, Yomiuri) and needs to be rewritten to reflect its status as an urban legend rather than some legitimate medical condition. Jun Kayama 17:05, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, perhaps you can explain, then, what the mysterious reference "Hon no Zasshi (in Japanese) (Hon no zasshi sha) (40), 1985: 55" means. What is "Hon no Zasshi"? It should be the name of the article, since that is how bibliographical notes are usually done--but what, then, is the name of the publication? And how to explain the page number, compared to the page numbers "1-15" for the next entry? Ha, I derive from this that "Hon no Zasshi" is a "magazine for books"--so what then is the title of the article being referenced? And why does it say "Hon no Zasshi" and "Hon no Zasshi sha" in the same reference? And why should one possible magazine article and two short articles in Japanese newspapers make for in-depth discussion? What if the newspaper articles are all tongue-in-cheek, from the man-bites-dog column? Have you read the articles? So no, this is not a "personal issue" at all, it's a Wikipedia issue, and the burden of proof is on those who say "this is reliable and in-depth". Drmies (talk) 18:35, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - I've already opened all the web-accessible sources on ja:青木まりこ現象 and looked for the AERA article by 吉岡秀子. Apparently you couldn't even figure out 本の雑誌 until Moscow Connection broke it down for you.
 * The web-accessible references are either dead links or have nothing to do with 青木まりこ現象. However, Japanese media (AERA, TBS Radio) have covered this so-called phenomenon. There are a heap of personal essays and some game show references which do not support notability, but there are enough references such as which spotlight it as an urban legend on par with, say, crop circles. Article in current state is inexcusable, but a rewrite taking into account its urban legend status in Japan should not be ruled out of the question, even if the article is tasteless. Jun Kayama 21:10, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * "本の雑誌" (Hon no Zasshi) is a Japanese monthly magazine. It looks like this: . The name means that it's a magazine about books. "本の雑誌社" (Hon no Zasshi-sha) is a publishing house. The name means "Hon no Zasshi Company". --Moscow Connection (talk) 19:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * That's a step in the right direction. For a magazine, the publishing company is unnecessary. But that leaves the question of what the title of the article is, and what the correct page numbers are. As for reliability, the magazine's articles are cited in various places (found it through Google Books), but this seems to be a personal essay, and thus we can hardly infer that the author is writing about something "real" and noteworthy. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 19:19, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The search for the name of the phenomenon in Japanese gives more than just Hon no Zasshi magazines: . And this article looks reliable: . --Moscow Connection (talk) 19:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The title of the article is いま書店界を震撼させる『青木まりこ現象』の謎と真実を追う！！. The page number are 2-15. --GU9udoy6Kg (talk) 14:22, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * So what's the reference to page 55 in the article? Drmies (talk) 16:23, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The 55 indicates page 55 of the 40th issue of the magazine, and the 2-15 indicates pages 2-15 of the 41th issue of the magazine. --GU9udoy6Kg (talk) 22:12, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. For easy reference, the Japanese article is at ja:青木まりこ現象 and is surprisingly long, with what at first glance appears to be an impressive list of citations and references. However, I suspect that they are a mixture of non-reliable sources, and reliable sources covering a running joke rather than actually demonstrating notability for the condition. I'm no expert on Japanese culture, but the citation from Tokyo Shimbun appears light-hearted. As for notability of the urban legend – well, perhaps; but the current article is about the alleged condition rather than the history of the urban legend, so it will be no loss to delete the existing page. – Fayenatic  L ondon 19:40, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - The Tokyo Shimbun article is dead serious, but Japanese media has an odd habit of picking up nonsense (cellphone exorcisms, Aokigahara is haunted etc) and running with them on major news outlets as commentary. It's not hard to infer the publisher for 本の雑誌 just ran with it after 1985 in order to boost readership. Most of this sort of nonsense gets dropped fairly quickly, but mention of 青木まりこ現象 has clocked almost 30 years now, so even if it is patently false (like fan death in Korea) the notability lies in how Japanese media has dealt with it rather than the actual so-called condition itself. Jun Kayama 21:21, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Some Japanese experts (psychologists, physicians, psychiatrists etc.) have been making consideration about the phenomenon. Moreover, several books was published with specializing the phenomenon. Please check the Further Readings. --GU9udoy6Kg (talk) 14:22, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, I removed the "reference" to The Lost Art of Reading for reasons explained on the talk page, which give me little hope that the others are valuable. Drmies (talk) 16:23, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * In this web page, Toshio Kasahara, who is a clinical psychologis, studies the phenomenon. --GU9udoy6Kg (talk) 22:19, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - Kasahara is a parapsychologist who believes in out-of-body experiences and paranormal phenomenon. Suggesting that he is a clinical psychologist is misleading and a borderline insult to the intelligence of others. That being said, there is quite a bit of media traffic on this ridiculous so-called condition, which says more about the Japanese propensity to embrace some random fringe theory and run with it. If the article cannot be rewritten to reflect its status as an urban legend and how it refuses to die in Japanese media, I'm all for deleting it with prejudice. Jun Kayama 03:54, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Google Search gives plenty of results. Here's one more, it calls it a urban legend:. Anyone can just rewrite the first sentence to say it is a urban legend. And here's a blog post that shows how some of the sources that are referenced in the article, but not available online, look:. --Moscow Connection (talk) 03:02, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete - How is shitting defecating in a book store notable or even a phenomenon? .... Anyway delete as non notable.  →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  22:22, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Mrs. Drmies would beg to differ. Drmies (talk) 00:08, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hahaha :) →Davey 2010→  →Talk to me!→  00:15, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * This is why I don't take you to Chapters any more . --kelapstick(bainuu) 01:23, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think Jun Kayama has demonstrated that the topic is notable by providing links to numerous sources and looking at the Aera article.
 * Comment - I loathe how Japanese academia plays fast and loose with footnotes and source material, never mind the Japanese blogosphere, and I strongly suspect that this so-called condition was hyped up by a niche print publication and gained traction solely by the preponderance of bookstores in Japan and some scatological Eureka moment which I find it impossible to share. As a bona fide medical condition with a credible scientific explanation, there is nothing behind it. As a sociocultural phenomenon which refuses to die an immediate and lasting death in Japanese media for the last 30 years, it deserves an article if fan death does in Wikipedia. The subject matter is preposterous, the article is a hack job, but still there are enough credible sources for WP:N and unlike the dozens of other ludicrous so-called conditions profiled in Japanese print and television, this one has a life of its own. Jun Kayama 03:54, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Actually, if this ridiculous article still exists by the end of this weekend, I will rewrite it entirely with an eye to keeping it in line with WP:OR and away from スカトロ趣味 (Scatophilia). Jun Kayama 12:50, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Jun Kayama, I am very sorry to have given you so much trouble. I don't know what to say except thank you. Jun Kayama様、お心遣い大変痛み入ります. 格別のご高配を賜り厚く御礼申し上げます. --GU9udoy6Kg (talk) 13:51, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * いや、別に礼や謝罪などいりません. I have no need of either gratitude or an apology. Jun Kayama 04:53, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * , I appreciate your comments here, but I find them hard to align with your earlier "keep" vote. Drmies (talk) 14:51, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - I don't have problems separating personal distaste for an article with whether it meets WP:RS and in this case, it meets the criteria for WP:RS through notable Japanese media sources, which is why I don't do things like AfD-bomb AKB48 articles for the hell of it. The article at issue is not written to reflect this, and I just edited the header this morning to reflect its urban legend status. As I stated above, if after this weekend no one fixes it, I'll do it, and if anyone still wants to torch the article afterwards, they can have at it. Jun Kayama 18:13, 15 May 2014 (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.