Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuuki Tanaka


 * 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 Userfy. The discussion is just on the edge of the numbers I would normally like to see to call a delete consensus, but I find the arguments to keep rather unconvincing ("She almost won, and other people near her are notable").

Moving this to User:Athomeinkobe/Yuuki Tanaka. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:47, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Yuuki Tanaka

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails wikiproject Tennis guidelines and nsport for notability. Not on any fedcup team, no main draw entries on the WTA tour, no wins in a $35,000+ minor league (ITF) event. This (so far) is simply one of a thousand other minor-league players. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:54, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:03, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:03, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
 * When looking at the multitude of aticles that link to this one, I can readily understand why it was created. If she is such a non-notable player, then surely it begs the question of whether or not all these (presumably notable) articles linking to her need to exist as well.--Gibson Flying V (talk) 01:57, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Almost all those links are tournament brackets from barely notable events. They are minor league tournaments. Just like baseball has minor league teams that are barely notable yet have 1000's of players listed through the years in list-form that are not notable. that's the case with these players. You'll note she hasn't won a notable event. What has happened is editors red link her name (wrongly) in all these brackets in hope that one day she becomes a notable player... heck she might one day. Then this article actually gets created and BAM... she has lots of instant links. Fyunck(click) (talk) 03:57, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep She came runner-up in a $75,000 tournament, is that not enough? And with the score at 9-9 in the tie-breaker, she was two points away from winning and becoming notable. Her teammate and two opponents in the doubles match are all notable. Yet she isn't? It appears that one of her opponents Akiko Omae only satisfies the notability criteria because she won those two points, while Tanaka lost them. So this AFD could have been about Omae instead. It seems strange that notability can be decided so arbitrarily.
 * But putting that aside, I am sure there is enough out there to satisfy GNG. I will add more to her actual biography from the Japanese sources already mentioned in the article and see if I can find anything else. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:05, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * It is not arbitrary at all. It is our guidelines, it is consensus.... one won and one lost. Certainly someone can meet GNG over and above our consensus Tennis Guidelines. Certainly this particular player could be the 1 in a 1000 minor league player that is truly special. That does happen. I just don't see it this time. The only thing that would make me pause is the item on the 2013 Summer Universiade, but even that is 10,000 university students. The rest is just low-level minor league tennis with no victories in $50,000+ tournaments. Fyunck(click) (talk) 04:20, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have written a biography using what I have found so far. In addition, this blog (belonging to a Nagoya sports massage therapist) notes that she was the subject of a 2-page profile in the March 2011 edition of the Japanese "Tennis" magazine. Getting my hands on the actual magazine is going to be difficult, but there is confirmation at the back number page of the magazine, where she is listed in the index as the first profile in a new series titled "Challengers". So there is certainty that she has received significant coverage (a 2-page profile) in a national magazine at least once. I will keep looking for more, but I think what I've found so far is a pretty good step towards meeting GNG. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 07:15, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep per AtHomeIn神戸's argument. Inter&#38;anthro (talk) 16:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Interesting. So far she does not meet consensus Tennis Guidelines, Wikipedia NSport guidelines, nor have we seen multiple sources (or any except from a blog of a massage therapist) that would show GNG. Yet you agree. Sorry but that seems strange to me. Fyunck(click) (talk) 20:39, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Let's be a bit more accurate in the description there. The blog refers to her having a 2-page spread in a national magazine, and I provided a link to the contents page of the magazine, which confirms she is the subject of her own article (but does not confirm the length). To summarize the blog, the writer is telling the regular customers of his business that a former customer is now living in Tokyo and the subject of an in-depth article in a major magazine. He finishes with "I've bought a copy, so you should too". That would be a very strange lie to tell to your customers, so I think it is very reasonable to accept that she was in fact the subject of this significant coverage. That was now five years ago and before she turned pro, so I'll keep looking for more. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 00:02, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I have found that she was part of the gold medal winning team of the Universiade in July 2013. The team was featured in a report in the October 2013 edition of Tennis Magazine. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 01:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete - I just don't see this article meeting WP:SPORTCRIT. Ameba clearly fails WP:BLPSPS and the subject obviously requires a fishing expedition into obscure Japanese print sources. She is tagged in tournament coverage here and here  by sources which qualify for WP:RS but she's just tagged by name. I find it more than a little questionable that a Japanese tennis player who doesn't even have her own page on Japanese Wikipedia  should merit a page on English Wikipedia solely on the basis of two print sources which are not readily accessible and a blog post which is inadmissible as WP:RS. I went to her blog page as well  to look for anything substantial to justify Keep but there is nothing. Jun Kayama 06:48, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't know whether this requires clarification, but I will say it once again for clarity. (1) I provided the blog link purely to give indication of the magazine's contents. The magazine is the source, the blog was the way I found it. (2) The magazine is far from an "obscure print source"; as far as I know it is the most widely-circulated tennis magazine in the country. (3) Accessibility of a source is not an issue (WP:SOURCEACCESS), nor is whether articles exist on other projects. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 07:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - スマッシュ is bigger than テ二マガ. There's only three magazines to speak of with significant readership in Japan for tennis, and most niche magazines like this absolutely do not qualify on their own as producing articles which meet WP:N on a national consciousness level in Japan. I don't mind whether an article is behind WP:PAYWALL usually since I already know Japanese sources tend to be very hard to find online, but I am not going to Jinbocho to look for an out-of-print two-page spread in a 2011 monthly magazine column which may or may not be dead, which apparently profiled 「挑戦者」 or rather 「選手歴のメチャメチャ浅いまだブレイクしてない新人」 with no WP:N achievements. If the subject somehow meets consensus Tennis Guidelines then 拍手万万歳 but as of right now there's nothing that meets WP:SPORTCRIT. If she has even been profiled in even any of the tabloid sports newspapers, I will pause to review thoroughly and if this gets stupid past a certain point I will just order the back number of テ二マガ myself to look at it. Jun Kayama 07:57, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * And per GNG it require multiple sources that feature her, not one. She may very well reach tennis guideline notability in the future so I would archive this page to be ready "if" the time comes. Fyunck(click) (talk) 08:08, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - Of course all she needs to do is win least one title in any of ITF Women's $50,000+ tournaments for consensus Tennis Guidelines which she has not achieved yet - her ITF Doubles win at Aschaffenburg on clay was a $25,000 Tournament . There's an interview after the 90th All Japan Tennis Championships but it's run by one of her sponsors and is nothing but her singing the praises of her new racket by Dunlop Srixon. I would like for the subject to meet the criteria for Keep in some way, shape, or form but it's not justifiable on the basis of achievements right now. Jun Kayama 18:46, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Summary: The week is almost up, so I will write my summary of the situation. Tanaka was an MVP of the national college championships and a gold medalist at the world university games. She hasn't had a $50,000+ tournament win yet, but was a runner-up at a $75,000 tournament. There has been some coverage in a national magazine and there is an actual biographical article that is sourced, rather than a bare table of victories which is standard for articles concerning players at her level. Her name appears in many articles, including the one for the $75,000 tournament where her teammate and opponents in the final each have articles, so her having an article would make that article more complete. Despite the above, if failing the consensus guideline is the turning point in this discussion, then I ask that the article be sent to my userspace so that the work is not lost and can be moved to mainspace if and when she gets that necessary win. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 08:21, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You know you can copy the article and put it in your user space yourself, just in case. As for your summary, I think the person who closes this is well able to summarize. If they feel she meets gng, then fine. But she is not notable for tennis by virtues of her minor, minor league and college accomplishments. She has not been in a WTA event or even won a minor league 50,000 ITF event. But I do think she will qualify one day so this should be saved to user space. Fyunck(click) (talk)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 15:53, 24 February 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  18:17, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Doesn't pass the criteria for athletes, and not enough in-depth coverage to show they pass WP:GNG.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:17, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete or Userfy - does not meet WP Tennis or sport guidelines for notability. See insufficient evidence that she meets general notability requirements per WP:GNG.--Wolbo (talk) 13:41, 12 March 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.