Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/My Wife is Wagatsuma-san


 * 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. (non-admin closure) — Omni Flames  ( talk   contribs ) 08:15, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

My Wife is Wagatsuma-san

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No coverage in reliable sources to meet the general notability guidelines nor does it meet those for books. The only coverage I could find was incidental mentions discussing Crunchyroll publishing digitally. Opencooper (talk) 05:36, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Opencooper (talk) 05:37, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment Mini-Reviewed by Jason Thompson for ANN (which means he may have also reviewed it for Otaku USA.SephyTheThird (talk) 11:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I will take a look at what I have later today, this article pretty much hinges on if it has the reception or not. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 13:16, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Some further digging found another minireview on a subblog of manga bookshelf, which I'm not sure is as reliable as the main site which has industry authors. I didn't have luck finding much else. Opencooper (talk) 14:29, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the problem is that most mentions in english will be bundled together with the other C'roll releases of that phase. The titles that are best known from Crunchyroll all have adaptations or pre-existing franchises (Space Brothers, A Silent Voice (manga), Heroic Legend of Arslan) SephyTheThird (talk) 20:45, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: The manga did chart on Oricon although it was ranked in the 30's for its run, and did show up in MADB for 13 volumes. It also was selected for Crunchyroll titles. I don't know if that's enough for anything. No anime or live-action adaptation but if the author gets a new hit afterwards maybe the author can have an article instead? AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 16:10, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Amazingly the same author wrote Fort of Apocalypse which doesn't have an article. SephyTheThird (talk) 20:45, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak Keep The mentions over at ANN, as well as this have me leaning towards a weak keep at this time. There is nothing against a re-nomination if time isn't good to this article. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:33, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - The coverage isn't exactly spectacular, but there does appear to be enough coverage for the manga to pass our notability guidelines. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 14:32, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   20:38, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep perhaps especially if it can be better improved. SwisterTwister   talk  06:32, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * What is your reason for keeping?SephyTheThird (talk) 21:00, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep as Manga and Anime generally have limited English sources, as they are Japanese creations. There are many articles like this one, about Japanese anime and manga, on the English Wiki, and these are all kept. Sheepythemouse :(talk) 14:42, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Neither of your points are a reason to keep the article. English sources in general might be "limited" compared to Japanese ones but they are hardly difficult to find with several major online sites as well as numerous printed material. Some of them even mention this series, but not outside of the group of works released at the same time on the same service. Also, many articles that you suggest are kept are actually deleted, they were all taken on their own merits just as this one must be.SephyTheThird (talk) 21:00, 12 April 2016 (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.