Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taro Aizu (2nd nomination)


 * 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   delete. -- Cirt (talk) 17:01, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Taro Aizu
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article appears to fail WP:AUTHOR on identical grounds to the previous AFD, i.e. a lack of supporting independent sources and the concern for the self-published nature of some of the works mentioned. The last AFD lacked discussion and the article was recreated just hours after deletion with no improvement; on request I am opening this for wider discussion. Hopefully more people will contribute their opinions this time around and the AFD might have more chance at sticking, particularly if there are any views on the possible notability of the haiku competition mentioned. --Fæ (talk) 09:41, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 19:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete as per previous AfD. The English version of this poet's book is self-published though Lulu.com; other than that his only English output is three poems included in an anthology, itself published through Lulu.com. The assertions regarding the two prizes are unsourced. The Gendai Haiku Society is one of many Japanese haiku societies but quite large. It appears from this page that they run several annual awards and it's unclear which of them is referred to, nor how notable they are. Some are open only to members. In any case the award was twenty years ago. The 2nd Love Poems Competition (2002), I can find nothing at all for. There seems no room for doubt that subject fails WP:AUTHOR. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 22:16, 9 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete and Salt: Demonstrably the subject fails notability criteria, and just as demonstrably, there are people out there who don't care that consensus has previously found this to be the case. Presuming this isn't a speedy candidate, the article should be salted.   Ravenswing  05:34, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * With regard to process, having gone through AFD we probably should not PROD and speedy on A7 grounds would not be suitable due to the national prizes mentioned which require assessment as to whether these might or might not be sufficient to support a rationale of notability. Fæ (talk) 09:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, of course A7 wouldn't be appropriate. I was thinking G4, myself.   Ravenswing  12:25, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * G4 was possible, but the last AFD was so weak that this seemed a fairer choice. Fæ (talk) 13:13, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete, Subject really doesn't seem notable at all, I cleaned up the article as best I could and dropped in a reference from the Japanese version so at least it is less visually disturbing and clean while it is here.Thisbites (talk) 02:39, 12 June 2011 (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.