Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unbelievable (TV series)


 * 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. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 14:01, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Unbelievable (TV series)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article is two sentences long. This is clearly not long enough for a substantive article; I can understand not wanting to delete the article when it was first created, but when it has been so for over six years, there is clearly no indication of any editor improving it any further. -- / Alex /21  09:47, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- / Alex /21  09:47, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - none of the reasons for deletion offered are valid. Articles can just be stubs! Japanese language article has both substantive materials and sourcing that indicate topic is notable. matt91486 (talk) 10:57, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * English language sources, suggest that viewership for some episodes is above 25 million, again strong indication of notability. Either way it readily passes NTVSERIES having been on FujiTV for decades. matt91486 (talk) 11:01, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * , do you plan to expand it at all? Or do you want it kept for the sake of it? -- / Alex /21  11:31, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Whether or not I plan to expand it is entirely irrelevant for its notability. I do not have Japanese language skills, so I would not be particularly well suited for expanding it. But a stub is not a valid reason for deletion. matt91486 (talk) 21:23, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * FWIW, Nakayama says 25 million people watched that episode, and millions more watched online. "People in China and Korea are very interested in what people in Japan are interested in," he says. is a primary source that would be unacceptable for that claim, and given the implication that the online millions were overseas viewers who couldn't watch on their TVs and that 25 million people in Japan (1/5 of the population of the whole country) tuned in is a bit ... unbelievable. There are lots of different ways to write "25 million" that are acceptable in formal written Japanese so I'm not going to bother to check, but a quick Googling for the most intuitive one for me brought up only a blog about the number of Twitter followers Conan O'Brien has. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 23:46, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * An entirely fair point -- and I certainly wouldn't add that into the article or anything. But, frankly, even if the number were five times less than that, it would easily pass NTVSERIES as a nationally broadcast program. matt91486 (talk) 02:24, 20 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete - This has been a hard one for me to make a decision on, while this may be a notable Japanese show (based on the fact that it has been running from 1997 to now as I could not find viewership numbers) the English article is likely so short due to the fact that it is not very popular (if at all) with international audiences. As far as I can tell it was never released with subtitles in anything other than Japanese making it inaccessible to people that do not speak Japanese. I see little point in keeping an article that gives almost no information about something inaccessible and of little interest to someone that does not know Japanese. While an article being short may not be a valid reason for deletion I do believe this fails WP:NOTE in regards to the English Wikipedia.  Hintswen   Talk |  Contribs   12:39, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I would also say this fails WP:DIRECTORY point 7.  Hintswen   Talk |  Contribs   12:47, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - there is no time limit and User:Matt91486 credibly asserts notability and the potential for expansion. @User:Alex 21: Trying to blackmail the expansion of a stub by threatening to axe it is not an approved procedure; nor does sarcasm help. @User:Hintswen - WP:Directory is about indiscriminate lists: this article contains no lists. Your main point about foreign language topics is just wrong, alas. Ingratis (talk) 16:31, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. Obviously notable per the Japanese article, and is correctly tagged for expansion from that. What I can't understand is why an editor who thinks the article is too short would want to shorten it even further to zero length. And why on Earth shouldn't people like me, who can't read Japanese, want to know something about Japanese topics? It is even more important to have an article in an English encyclopedia when a Google search in English finds little of relevance, but Japanese sources are available. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:33, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep This is clearly a case of 'better something than nothing at all', and we don't delete stubs because they exist as stubs, especially for series that have aired this long. Though because of the existence of the Netflix miniseries, a move of this page to Unbelievable (Japanese TV series) should be considered for the purposes of clarity, and this title converted to a DAB page for both series entitled Unbelievable (note: I will add a hatnote to this page as I assume this got on the nom's radar due to the Netflix miniseries).  Nate  • ( chatter ) 20:29, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * If that's the reason for this getting on the nom's radar then it's a totally inappropriate reaction. We don't delete articles just because something else turns up with the same name - we disambiguate. And the initial tagging of this for speedy deletion as having no context was so far wrong as to cast doubt on the good faith being shown here in this nomination. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:50, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd be perfectly happy to support such a page move and DAB. matt91486 (talk) 21:28, 18 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Weak keep for now I'm having a hard time trying to convince myself that a variety show with 27 hits on the Mainichi website isn't notable. Plus, the Nikkei defines it as one of the representative works of East Group, and in an article about machine translation and AI supporting Japan's globalization  uses it in the opening sentence as though to say "Hey, you know that one show that you probably know?" As an aside, while I don't watch as much variety TV as I probably should and so am not personally familiar with the show, I'm finding it hard to believe that a long-running TV show hosted by the great Beat Takeshi could be non-notable enough not to be able to sustain a substantial article in the future. I wouldn't mind a redirect to Takeshi's article in the meantime, given that the current article basically includes no useful information that isn't also in that article (unsourced and apparently contradictory as it is). AFD is not the place to discuss uncontroversial redirects, but is the place to come for consensus that a topic doesn't merit its own article, which will certainly not be found here. Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 23:34, 19 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment: I've found these sources in the first five pages of a Google News search for "奇跡体験!アンビリバボー", thank you.                 FoxyGrampa75 (talk) 00:03, 20 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 01:39, 21 September 2019 (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.