Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Deadman Wonderland

Closing administrator's rationale
'''If you choose to add follow-on comments to this closing summary, please do so in a separate section below it. Do not interrupt my comments here.'''

Raw count analysis

 * Delete
 * 1) Carlossuarez46 (nominator)
 * 2) Hersfold
 * 3) TheFarix (9 edits) (article editor - 6 article edits)


 * Keep
 * 1) N-Denizen (5 edits) (article creator - 19 article edits)
 * 2) Quasirandom (4 edits) (1 article edit - added interwiki link)
 * 3) Doceirias (6 edits)
 * 4) Ned Scott
 * 5) Erachima


 * Neutral or non-participatory
 * 1) The wub (deletion sorting)
 * 2) Ultraexactzz (updated deletion category)

Arguments

 * Delete
 * 1) nn manga
 * 2) w/o sources
 * 3) written by redlinks
 * 4) establishes no notability for the book
 * 5) violates WP:PLOT
 * 6) No references
 * 7) original creator of the article stated in an edit summary that the work is too obscure and unknown to have a proper reception section. However, the notability of this work depends heavily on such a section, or similar section using third-party sources, being written
 * 8) does not inherit notabilty from creators


 * Keep
 * 1) Article has been considerable improved since nomination
 * 2) nomination is weak
 * 3) nomination came too soon after article created
 * 4) Manga coverage is spotty
 * 5) contains enough encyclopedic content to be useful
 * 6) Reception sections for untranslated manga are nigh impossible to find, and have never been a requirement for anything below a B rating
 * 7) typical article for manga

Summary
There were no clear-cut incontrovertible arguments on either side. Both sides have good points. But it occurs to me that the delete arguments can be satisfied by a further search for english sources and a little article development, which this AfD did not allow by being made so soon after creation. My decision, therefore is Keep.  Jerry  talk ¤ count/logs 02:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)