Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sekai de Ichiban Tsuyoku Naritai!


 * 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. Dipankan ( Have a chat? ) 11:18, 6 July 2012 (UTC) (non-admin closure)

Sekai de Ichiban Tsuyoku Naritai!

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This article fails per WP:N, looking at sources this appears to be a one shot manga which in 2011 an announcement was made that it would be turned into an anime, no recent news that I could find since then. Deprodded by an IP. Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:13, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
 * There's actually at least two volumes; a second was released in April. The obi again indicates that the an anime is in the works. It's planned to come out next year according to the official blog (via ja.wiki) Shiroi Hane (talk) 02:03, 24 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:14, 22 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Very weak keep or incubate. The fact that there were sources confirming that an anime adaptation was in the works should just barely be enough to establish notability (but not by much). However, due to a lack of news since then and few reliable sources, incubation until more sources are found and the anime's release is near won't hurt either. Of course, additional sources are always welcomed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:59, 24 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger One ping only 18:17, 29 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: I went over to the Japanese wiki entry for the series and there seems to be a lot of sources, but it'll take me a while to see if they're all usable or not. (Hey, all Wikipedias suffer the same issues of people putting in sources that actually aren't usable.)Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:48, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's verifiable though the sources are in Japanese (I checked the jp article). - Mailer Diablo 02:06, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, relative Japanese article is full of references. Cavarrone (talk) 05:59, 6 July 2012 (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.