Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess from the Moon


 * 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. Speedy, SNOW, and withdrawn. I note that the nominator's final comment is invalid: article retention is not based on improvement, only on evidence of notability, which is clearly presented. Drmies (talk) 17:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Princess from the Moon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There are no references here whatsoever showing notability--only databases known to publish material published by film creators or participants. Jeremy112233 (talk) 00:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep: Article for Kon Ichikawa film starring Toshiro Mifune with articles on two other Wikipedias and released by The Criterion Collection on Hulu.--MoonMetropolis (talk) 01:01, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Still no references supporting notability, would you please add them if they exist. Jeremy112233 (talk) 01:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hulu is not a notable source. Jeremy112233 (talk) 01:31, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep, absurd nomination. We're seriously debating deleting a feature film directed by Kon Ichikawa, starring Toshiro Mifune (the most notable Japanese film actor in history), and released domestically by the Criterion Collection?!?  Are we trying to pretend that this somehow came out and wasn't covered by Japanese language reliable sources?  Is it April Fools Day already?  Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  03:23, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The editor who nominated it for deletion did so purely out of spite. In fact, he had previously nominated it for speedy deletion.  I wish I were making this up.  See here.  The other articles he tried to get speedy deleted were 0-D Beat Drop, A Gun for Jennifer, and Ilsa, the Wicked Warden.  All of them are currently AfD'd and all of them are absolutely absurd candidates.  If I had written the article for Citizen Kane, he would have tried to get that deleted too.--MoonMetropolis (talk) 04:25, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Incorrect, I just have an issue with articles being posted with zero references, and the assumption that notability has something to do with which random editors read an article and not hard evidence. Again though, thus the AFD, whatever the result, C'est la vie :) Jeremy112233 (talk) 04:28, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * And yes, a Citizen Kane article with no references would have no business on Wikipedia, in my very humble opinion. But alas, it has 158 of them. Jeremy112233 (talk) 04:29, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * "Articles for deletion" is not "articles for cleanup". Your lack of knowledge of Wikipedia policy is appalling.  If you see a stub article without sources, you ADD THEM.  You don't nominate the article for deletion and you certainly don't nominate it for speedy deletion.  It's absolutely ridiculous that I'm the one who has to tell you this.  An editor who has been here as long as you have really should know better.--MoonMetropolis (talk) 04:32, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Seriously, before you say references don't matter, now you claim it is the role of other editors to add them for you in the case of unsure notability on an article you created? At least we're getting closer to the truth--that an article needs references to be kept (in most cases). Jeremy112233 (talk) 04:37, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I have never once said that references don't matter. I'm saying that this is not how you deal with unreferenced articles.  A quick Google search could have more than established this film's notability.  Hell, the fact that it's directed by Kon Ichikawa and stars Toshiro Mifune makes its notability extremely obvious.  And yes, Hulu is a notable source.  I am trying really hard to be civil, but you make it incredibly difficult.  Please do not nominate any more of my articles for deletion when every single one of them is clearly notable.  You are making yourself look absolutely ridiculous and I'm sure the other editor here agrees with me.--MoonMetropolis (talk) 04:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I can truly tell that yes, you are trying very hard to be civil to the "ridiculous" editor, but you still haven't added any references. Jeremy112233 (talk) 04:47, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Just use the Google Books and Google News tools handily provided above, and add "Mifune" to the search criteria. Sources in English are ample. Try a similar search for "Taketori Monogatari", the transliteration of the Japanese name of the film. Plenty of sources. We don't delete articles about notable topics just because sources are not yet in the article. We keep such articles and improve them, by expanding them and adding sources. I encourage the nominator to consider following the wise procedures described in WP:BEFORE in the future.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  04:52, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:20, 9 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep and trout the nominator for starting a half dozen of silly and pointy AfDs about obviously notable films not daring to do a minimal WP:BEFORE. With respect, please don't waste our time anymore. Cavarrone 16:36, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Snow keep. Not Ichikawa's best film (the Los Angeles Daily News snarked, "to American eyes it looks like Close Encounters meets Splash in ancient Japan" ) but clearly notable. --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:40, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: I see references have finally been added to the piece, thus there is no loner a reason to consider deleting the article. Jeremy112233 (talk) 17:16, 9 October 2013 (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.