Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shusaku opening


 * 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The result was speedy keep (nomination withdrawn). (non-admin closure) Jumpytoo Talk 15:53, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Shusaku opening

 * – ( View AfD View log )

PRODed with "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing General notability guideline requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. " PROD removed without explanation despite my request for one. The term seems pretty non-existent in English outside Wikipedia. Google Books gives two hits, one seems to be mention in passing, the other, a few sentences in a book about Go strategy, I can't access it and I am concerned it could be reproducing content from Wikipedia. I have serious doubts this needs a stand-alone article since it appears we cannot write more than few sentences about this anyway. Maybe some merge and redirect to Fuseki could be used as an WP:ATD? That said, it's possible more WP:SIGCOV exists in Japanese (however, no ja wiki article is interwikied, and the Chinese one is even worse than ours and totally unrefenreced to boot). Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:18, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  04:18, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  04:22, 9 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. I have added more references, which, in my humble opinion, can prove the notability of Shusaku opening. --Neo-Jay (talk) 07:22, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I appreciate you expanding on this. As the sources cited are not English, could you tell us if they meet the requirements of WP:SIGCOV and WP:RS? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 08:14, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you. There are eight non-English references now, six of which are published books (with ISBN) written by notable authors (Go Seigen, Rin Kaiho, Keiichi Kiriyama, Li Jie, and Naoki Hane), one of which is an article published in a notable journal (Historical Monthly). I think that they are reliable sources and have significant coverage. --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @Neo-Jay I accept they are reliable. Before I withdraw this deletion proposal (which I am close to), could you comment on how at least two sources meet WP:SIGCOV ? Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 09:34, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your question. Probably some of the references do not meet "significant coverage". But they serve as inline citations by providing sources for specific statements in text. --Neo-Jay (talk) 09:55, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @Neo-Jay It's fine if some do not. I interpret SIGCOV as at met if at least two sources meet it. Could you point to such sources? No need for entire books dedicated to this concept, a chapter or such would do. Few paragraphs may suffice. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here  10:36, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your explanation. Page 78 (whole page, two paragraphs) of Rin Kaiho 2013 (footnote 2) and page 182 (whole page, two paragraphs) of Naoki Hane 2012 (footnote 7) discuss Shusaku opening. And I added a book (a volume of a book series) as further reading, the whole of which discusses Shusaku opening. Thank you.--Neo-Jay (talk) 12:15, 9 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep The prod process is only for "uncontroversial deletion" but we already see the nomination backing away from this with its talk of merger and withdrawal. So that prod was improper and so is this nomination too, with its talk of a source search in English, when this classic game is most popular in China and Japan.  Neo-Jay has ably demonstrated that improvement is feasible and so our policy WP:ATD applies, "If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page."  See also WP:GO. Andrew🐉(talk) 08:26, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep: While the article needs to be improved, even a cursory study of go will reveal the notability of this subject. —¿philoserf? (talk) 03:11, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Withdraw. My concerns have been addressed, thank you to Neo-Jay for expansion with foreign language sources which I think we can AGF. No remaining delete votes. Good save. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 06:37, 10 September 2021 (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.