Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Masshiro


 * 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 snow keep due to nomination withdrawal and everyone else indicating it should be kept. ··· 日本穣 ? · 投稿  · Talk to Nihonjoe ·  Join WP Japan ! 20:06, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Masshiro

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Delete. - There is absolutely no indication of notability; the references are all in Japanese and the external links seem promotional in nature.  Ormr2014 | Talk Ormr2014 (talk) 20:28, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep The fact the references are in Japanese is irrelevant to an AfD discussion (see the second criterion in WP:GNG). The issue is whether there are WP:RS or not. The article already cites multiple articles in major Japanese news sources such as Oricon and Sports Nippon, and there are plenty more:, , , , , etc. Admittedly, one reason it was the subject of so much coverage was that it was a ratings failure, despite featuring a major star. Still, failure does not mean it is not notable. As a golden hour TV show on a major network, the show easily clears WP:GNG. Michitaro (talk) 22:32, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
 * - The language of the sources is relevant per Citing Non-English Sources. Because none of the sources cited are in English (given that this is an English Wiki), the ability to adequately gauge the legitimacy of inclusion is severely hindered. Furthermore, according to Citing Non-English Sources, "if a dispute arises involving a citation to a non-English source, editors may request that a quotation of relevant portions of the original source be provided, either in text, in a footnote, or on the article talk page."
 * and
 * "When quoting a non-English source (whether in the main text, in a footnote, or on the talk page), a translation into English should always accompany the quote."  Ormr2014 | Talk
 * If you want to dispute that the Japanese sources are RS, or argue that the citations are incorrect, you may do so. That can be an issue on an AfD, though often it is better to start with a discussion on the article talk page first. But the fact they are in Japanese itself is not an issue for the AfD. Articles in any language can be cited as support in an AfD discussion. And given WP:NRVE, the mere existence of such Japanese RS -- and not their actual citation -- is sufficient to prove notability. Michitaro (talk) 00:41, 13 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. The series received mediocre ratings but lots of third-party media coverage, so the basic WP:GNG notability criteria are adequately satisfied. --DAJF (talk) 23:37, 12 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. --DAJF (talk) 23:37, 12 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep. As Michitaro says, Japanese-language sources are certainly satisfactory to establish notability. --Arxiloxos (talk) 03:40, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

This is not an argument against the use of Japanese sources per se, but the validity of citing only Japanese sources as proof of notability, without English translations, and the Wikipedia policy concerning the use of foreign language sources as outlined in Citing Non-English Sources, which clearly states that such sources should be accompanied with English translations when there is a dispute. This article fails to comply with this rule.  Ormr2014 | Talk
 * Comment It's not against policy for an article to cite only non-English sources as proof of notability without translations, though. Translations are only needed when making a direct quote or when an editor makes a request challenging a specific citation, which hasn't happened here. If there's something you'd like translated, that can be done. --Cckerberos (talk) 08:58, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
 * When a "dispute" (the word used by Wikipedia and not my own choice of words) arises over non-English citations, a translation must be provided. There is and has been a dispute in the form of this AFD. I am challenging the validity of these sources as proving notability and therefore English translations must be provided.


 * Here's the main problem where these citations are concerned. Whenever I come across non-English citations, I run them through Google translate to determine the validity of the citations. Having done so with these particular citations, I found nothing to support notability, but as the sources are not in English, making a case against them is problematic, which is why I have repeatedly emphasized the need to provide English translations (which Wikipedia's policies indicate is the correct course of action), which the author and others voting in favor of keeping the article have continually refused. So, to provide a little greater clarity, I will provide a synopsis of the first three citations and links to their English translation for others to peruse:


 * Citation #1: A four paragraph blog post stating simply that Horikita Maki will be playing in “Pure White”


 * Citation #2: Another article stating the same and giving a brief description of the show.


 * Citation #3: Another description of the show


 * Anyone who reads the English translations of the citations can clearly see they all pretty much simply describe the show and do not establish notability.Ormr2014 (talk) 17:07, 13 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I agree that an AfD is a dispute, but policy states that editors "may request" a translation of a citation in the case of a dispute, not that translations for all non-English sources must automatically be provided. You're correct that in this case the cites describe the show rather than provide analysis of it; they seem to have been cited only for specific facts. But they (and more so those provided by Michitaro) are still enough for WP:GNG as their existence shows "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". In this case, the specific claim to notability seems to be that the article's subject was a primetime show on a major national network starring a popular actress. --Cckerberos (talk) 18:20, 13 May 2015 (UTC)


 * My apologies. I got so wrapped up in the discussion that I completely overlooked 's citations. I'm Withdrawing my Nomination, but would appreciate someone adding those to the article. Ormr2014 (talk) 18:32, 13 May 2015 (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.