Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tonbokiri


 * 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, without prejudice against possible merger. There appears to be some movement towards a merger consensus, and that conversation can certainly continue. Mojo Hand (talk) 05:58, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Tonbokiri

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A legendary weapon from Japanese history. This probably exists, but the content fails WP:V. Unsourced since 2011. A Google search yields only video game and other pop culture-related material. If somebody reads Japanese and could help out, that would be great, but after 5 unsourced years this probably needs to go otherwise.  Sandstein  17:18, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. _dk (talk) 19:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I also don't see how it can really be considered independently of the main stub on the three spears, Three Great Spears of Japan. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:45, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:45, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:45, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Hm. That does have a source,, which at p. 31 does nothing more than mention these three spears. There might be something here, at least for one article about all three spears, but we'd need something by the way of sources.  Sandstein   20:20, 8 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. While I can't read it, the Japanese version of this article is longer and has a source, which suggests to me that it's verifiable in principle. Otherwise, it seems a decent stub and we can afford to wait for someone with the language skills to add citations. Joe Roe (talk) 20:27, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * That source is a dead link of a Asahi Shimbun newspaper article? That is not inspiring confidence. Frankly I would like there to be an article, but after five years of no WP:V one has to got to draw the line somewhere.  Sandstein   22:05, 8 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Just a reminder to everyone that the very internet technology that is allowing us to have this conversation makes any foreign language article readable enough. Either by using the Chrome browser with the built-in translation function -- or simply pasting the webpage URL into Google Translate's webpage. The future has arrived. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:04, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Having seen its output from languages I can read, I'm reluctant to rely on Google Translate for anything other than single words and short phrases. Running ja:蜻蛉切 through it gave such insights as the weapon being "known for having patronized world three people spear was called spear" and that references can be found in "Toshiyuki Sato supervision, "this can be seen better," arms and armor "of legend: the holy sword Excalibur, from Demon Blade village positive until the shield Aegis"". Joe Roe (talk) 22:00, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * True, it does seem to have a real problem converting logogram languages but I do find it useful for determining if a ref is "substantial coverage," anyway. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:08, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Though I see the Japanese writing system is a combination of logogram and syllabic. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep -- This is a stub. The fact that there is a longer Japanese article suggests to me that there is more to be said and that it is not (for example a hoax or original research).  We need to be patient until someone can expand it.  The criterion is verifiability, not that it is verified.  Peterkingiron (talk) 17:10, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Verifiabilty means, as noted below, "verifiable for the reader", i.e., the existence of references in the article, not just the hypothetical existence of sources.  Sandstein   10:09, 12 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - WP:V says, "Readers must be able to check that any of the information within Wikipedia articles is not just made up." This weapon probably exists, and if so is certainly notable. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's precisely the problem: readers must be able to check the information in the article, but they cannot do so for lack of references. What you wrote is an argument for deletion.  Sandstein   10:09, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you mean. Do you believe this spear is made up? The first link on the page is to Three Great Spears of Japan, where the spear is mentioned in a book with the transliteration of "tonbogiri" (perhaps it should be moved to that name?). Under that name there are more results (in google books, some are self-published or novelizations). I added the citation from that article to this one, I really don't think this is a hoax. If the article is deleted, perhaps it should be replaced with a redirect to the three great spears article. Smmurphy(Talk) 13:22, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * It's probably not a hoax. But all of the content is unverifiable to the reader: Because there are no references, the reader cannot (without performing their own research) verify that the spear exists, or that any of the article's contents (such as the legend about the origin of the name) are not just made up by whoever wrote the article. That's why we have WP:V, which requires that we delete articles or content for which, even after being challenged, no references are provided.  Sandstein   15:42, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm a bit confused to read, "That's why we have WP:V, which requires that we delete articles or content for which, even after being challenged, no references are provided." I don't think that is what WP:V is about at all. WP:V does note that if no third-party sources can be found, then wikipedia should not have an article about it, referencing WP:N. But we know there are third-party sources, I added one, pointed out that many more can be found when searching using an alternate spelling, and there are a number in Japanese. In any case, I've added a second reference. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:22, 12 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - The first third of the Asahi Shimbun article is available at the Internet Archive. To give a rough translation:
 * ''One of the Three Great Spears of Japan, the Tonbokiri used by one of Tokugawa Ieyasu's generals Honda Tadakatsu, will be put on display for the first time in 11 years. Belonging to the collection of Numazu, Shizuoka businessman Toshio Yabe (1905-1996), it will be put on display at the Sano Art Museum in Mishima, Shizuoka from the 9th [January 2015].
 * ''The "Dragonfly Cut in Half" Legend
 * ''According to the Sano Art Museum, the Tonbokiri was crafted by Masazane Fujiwara, an apprentice of Muramasa. Its beautiful blade pattern is a feature and the blade is 43.7cm long. The story of a dragonfly flying into it and being cut in half while the spear was standing at a battle site has survived.
 * ''The Tonbokiri at the "Mikawa Warriors Palace" museum in Okazaki, Aichi is a replica, and the authentic item was in Yabe's possession.
 * The article uses "according to the museum", which in itself is not very convincing language. The Japanese wiki article has one more source (which devotes about 10 sentences to the topic) and some further details on the spear, plus of another spear that may have been in the Honda household during the Edo period. The source at Three Great Spears of Japan only mentions the Tonbokiri (Tonbogiri) and other two spears by name, with no further details about the items given. The two Japanese sources verify the spear existed. Whether they satisfy the notability requirements I'm not so sure. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the research! Do you think we have enough sources for the article Three Great Spears of Japan as a whole, at least? We could merge this article into it.  Sandstein   10:09, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Currently articles for the other two spears have not been created on the English wiki, but each spear has its own article on the Japanese wiki. I haven't looked at the other two Japanese articles in great detail, but the best-sourced one appears to be Otegine. But more than half of that article is about replicas held by various museums. Information on the original weapons appears to be light. I doubt we could ever write more than five paragraphs on each weapon, so merging Tonbokiri into the three spears article and having all of the information in one place sounds like a good idea. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 00:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Keep or Merge with three great spears article. There are reliable sources on this topic, although most are in Japanese, apparently. I think it's notable, but maybe not as a standalone article.--Yellow Diamond (talk) 03:07, 15 December 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.