Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monica Naisen


 * 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 redirect to Martyrs of Japan. Redirecting to a possible target, if there will be a better list, feel free to move. Tone 17:58, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

Monica Naisen

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:GNG Collaboratio (talk) 12:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:23, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:23, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:23, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:23, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Icewhiz (talk) 12:23, 6 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep. We have always considered people beatified by the Catholic Church to be notable. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:40, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Article is so poorly written that it may confuse more readers than it helps. That said, beatified martyrs are notable.  This book may help straighten the story out  this one  is even more helpful. E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:23, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete You’re not going to find enough information that can add up to encyclopedic content and they won’t come from reliable sources. Trillfendi (talk) 15:53, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete The relevant part of WP:NCATHOLIC reads: 'In general, an individual is presumed to be notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple verifiable independent, reliable sources. In particular, an individual will almost always have sufficient coverage to qualify if they: [...] 3. Are in the process of possible canonization and are recognized by the titles "Venerable" and/or "Blessed"'. The problem here is the first sentence in that guideline. I could find nothing which included any more detail than already in the article, and most sources weren't anything near WP:RS and looked like copies of each other. I could find nothing better about either John Baptist Zola or John Naisen. I suspect that their files have been gathering dust in the Congregation for the Causes of Saints for over 300 years. There simply has not been enough published about them to support an article. Narky Blert (talk) 18:40, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Her name was added to the Roman Martyrology along with Matthew Araki and his companions. All were added in 1867 with a feast day of 12 July. They share the same story. So rename but keep the redirect to Matthew Araki and his companions or Matthias Araki and his companions. Note that there is also a single page for Perpetua and Felicitas. Genium. 15:38, Aug 8, 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd be happy with redirects to a single article for all of them. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:28, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I also would be happy with a merge and redirect. (That was why I searched Zola and John, wondering if the three could be kept as a group.) A wider-ranging article explaining the context would be much more useful to readers than the current two-liner. Narky Blert (talk) 05:22, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Not every individual who has been granted sainthood by the Catholic Church is default notable. Just consider that in some cases it is not clear anyone even knowns the names of all people covered by a grant of sainthood. This article with its failure to date at all the life of Naisen is a disservice to anyone who finds it and should not be kept.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:42, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Sainthood in Catholicism isn't a grant, it's an acknowledgment. There are countless saints who haven't been awarded the title. Narky Blert (talk) 08:47, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Redirect to either 205 Martyrs of Japan or Martyrs of Japan (since I can't seem to find a list of the former to confirm her being one of them); the fact that almost no one on that list is a blue link completely throws out the window the claim made by the one "keep" !vote so far that beatified people (essentially just names on lists) are inherently notable enough for standalone articles. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 08:50, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I assume you do know that Wikipedia is a work in progress? Lack of articles so far does not equal lack of notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:03, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
 * The Vatican apparently beatifies (or in 1867 beatified) virtually every single "Christian martyr" in 16th and 17th century Japan regardless of whether anything could be written about them. (I put "Christian martyr" in scare-quotes because from the point of view of the Tokugawa government, still technically in power in 1867, this woman and others like her were guilty of treason for harbouring Spanish and Portuguese spies. I doubt any modern sources that take this view -- I remember reading about the treaties of Tordesillas and Saragossa in an Irish state-sponsored middle school history textbook, so the view that the Catholic church at that time was supporting Spanish and Portuguese imperialism is certainly mainstream, and certainly the somewhat-polemical writer still often cited as a scholar Lafcadio Hearn felt the same [his chapter "The Jesuit Peril" available here leaps to mind] -- even mention this person, which presents a POV problem.) According to our article on beatification (not an expert myself) Since the reforms of 1983, one miracle must be believed to have taken place through the intercession of the person to be beatified, the implication being that before that point anyone could be beatified without there even being legends that they had performed such-and-such miracle. The assumption that beatified individuals are noteworthy is based on the assumption that beatified individuals have received a lot of coverage in reliable secondary sources, and while this may not be thoroughly disproved by the fact we have lists of Japanese martyrs from the early Edo period, almost none of whom merit articles because almost all of them are just names about whom we know almost nothing, the burden is still on the party wishing to maintain a standalone article to demonstrate that such-and-such an individual is notable enough for an article despite being just a name about whom we know almost nothing. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 09:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:NCATHOLIC due to lack of significant coverage Taewangkorea (talk) 11:21, 13 August 2019 (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.