Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:KrebMarkt/Bitter Virgin

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was move to mainspace. Salvio Let's talk about it! 22:50, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

User:KrebMarkt/Bitter Virgin


Clearly a WP:FAKEARTICLE. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions)  22:06, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. The real question this Mfd ought to be discussing is why it should not be immediately moved into main articlespace.
 * If you look at the original 2009 AfD, 3 specifically mention upcoming French reviews... and what do I spy no fewer than 7 of in the External links? And there are probably some more reviews in my CSE. --Gwern (contribs) 22:42 20 October 2011 (GMT)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. --Calathan (talk) 01:18, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep and move back to main space, assuming the French reviews provide sufficient coverage. This page was userfied as a result of Articles for deletion/Bitter Virgin, with the expectation that it would be moved back to main space once there were more reviews available.  Not all of the external links seem to provide in depth coverage, but enough of them do that I think it would now meet the notability guidelines (though note that I can't read French, so I'm not entirely sure what the linked pages say). Calathan (talk) 01:30, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment lol, i feel rather nostalgic of the good old days... More seriously Japanese edition volume 1 right from Square Enix Japan website. As for whatever it is notable, the answer is yes as while the first volume received a basic review in the issue #156 of the French Animeland, it was fellowed by a 3 pages coverage in the issue #157. It would be very evil from my part to drop a lot of French reviews as i will not work on the article in any foreseeable future and using the wall of blue ext-links to reliable sources or RS reviews would not be fair...
 * Yet i guess this is unavoidable :
 * ja ''Young Gangan' listing the series among those serialized and Square Enix ja hits where we can find in which issue it was serialized
 * Animeland web counter part, short form reviews : vol 1 vol 2 vol 3 vol 4
 * Manga News staff reviews :vol 1 vol 2 vol 3 vol 4
 * Manga Sanctuary staff reviews
 * Planète BD vol 1 vol 2 vol 3 vol 4
 * BD Gest' : vol 2
 * Quite a while i haven't written this much on Wikipedia. --KrebMarkt (talk) 19:40, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep and Mainspace - this is a sandbox article, not a fake article. --Malkinann (talk) 22:10, 21 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep or move to mainspace. I think the nominator read the lede and thought Wikipedia is not for things made up one day.  However, see the references.  This is a real book.  The lede should be improved along the lines of WP:WAF.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 13:45, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep and move to mainspace''' Well written, well sourced. The Last Angry Man (talk) 18:13, 25 October 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.