Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Japan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

See also: Anime and manga-related deletions


 Points of interest related to Japan on Wikipedia 
Basic list - Portal - Category - WikiProject - Stubs - Deletions - Cleanup
Shortcut:
WP:DSJ
Deletion Sorting
Project
Project page (talk)
Lists (by ABC)
Lists (by topic)
AfD: Today, Yesterday
edit · changes

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Japan. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting.

You can help maintain the list on this page:

  • To add a new AfD discussion (once it has already been opened on WP:AFD):
  • Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  • You can also tag the AfD by adding
{{subst:delsort|Japan}}<small>—~~~~</small>
to it, which will inform users that it has been listed here.
  • Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
  • You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Japan.

Please note that adding an AfD to, or removing it from, this page does not add it to, or remove it from, the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page, before adding it to this page.

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Asia

Archive Relevant archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Japan/archive.
Purge page cache Watch this page

Contents


[edit] Japan

[edit] Big in Japan Softball Club

Big in Japan Softball Club (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Contested PROD. Unreferenced aticle about non-notable amateur softball team. Thetrick (talk) 16:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

we're working on it. - BIJ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.143.172.29 (talk) 18:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete non notable team of congressional staffers. and also delete Congressional Softball League. Lots of people play in these sorts of work leagues... none of them are notable. Spanneraol (talk) 19:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment – agree on deleting Congressional Softball League. — X96lee15 (talk) 19:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
      • Comment - I'll file a separate AfD as the CSL article has a much longer history. --Thetrick (talk) 20:36, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alvis Ojeda

Alvis Ojeda (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Never played at the highest level in his sport (never made it to Major League Baseball) and hasn't received significant media coverage, thus not meeting the WP:BIO/WP:ATHLETE notability standard. brewcrewer (yada, yada) 17:47, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

I would also note that there are quite a number of secondary sources which discuss this player: [1], and he has played for the Navegantes del Magallanes in the Venezuelan Professional Baseball League which is the top league in his native country.[2] Kinston eagle (talk) 19:12, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
What general notability guideline doesn't he meet? "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject." He meets all that through the articles cited above. "If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be needed to prove notability." He also has coverage from multiple sources - from multiple countries. The fact that he has met general notability guidelines was a given. The only question in my mind was whether he also lived up to the higher standards for notability imposed by the relevant wikiproject. In my opinion he does. Kinston eagle (talk) 20:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • I've looked through the secondary sources from Google News that Kinston eagle linked to above, and I think it's a good example of how it can be misleading to rely on counts of hits. I didn't see any sources that provided information that could actually be used to expand the article; they were all either accounts of individual minor league games in which he played or articles with trivial mentions of him in a list of players. (I admit, however, that I was not able to read the Spanish-language articles.) Hence, these are the type of references that WP:BIO discusses when it says "trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability." BRMo (talk) 03:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • The WikiProject standards (Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball#Players) are not intended to impose a higher or different standard; rather, they represent an attempt to apply the general notability standards to the special case of baseball, which has unique characteristics not found in most other professional sports. In particular, Minor League Baseball consists of leagues that are essentially training programs for Major League Baseball, and hence aren't quite the same as "fully professional" leagues in other sports. The WikiProject standards are based on the criteria that have been persuasive in past AfD decisions. BRMo (talk) 03:54, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep per participation in top level professional leagues in Japan and Venezuela. Spanneraol (talk) 20:29, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keepscases Keepscases (talk) 20:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Close as bad nom because the standard for professional athletes is "played in a fully professional league" and that has been met. The "highest level" standard only applies to amateur athletes. There is no policy based justification for deletion presented by the nominator. Jim Miller (talk) 21:17, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Firstly, "bad nom" is not a reason for the procedural close of an afd discussion. Secondly, the "played in a fully professional league" is obviously meant to be understood as connected to the second prong of WP:ATHLETE - "highest level." Otherwise, every single minor leaguer - since they play in a fully professional league - would be considered notable for Wikipedia notability purposes. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 15:20, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Is there any evidence that he's actually played even one game in Nippon Professional Baseball? I wasn't able to locate any site providing English-language season-to-date statistics, but this site provides box scores, and I didn't see his name in any of the Hanshin Tigers boxes. As has often been noted, minor leagues are on ambiguous ground regarding WP:ATHLETE, since modern minor leagues are basically training programs and reserve rosters for Major League Baseball. Because the Venezuelan Professional Baseball League is part of minor league baseball, I think it shares these concerns. However, if he's actually played at the highest level in Japan, I wouldn't have any problem with keeping the article. BRMo (talk) 22:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
He is on their roster. Here is his page on their site: [3] Kinston eagle (talk) 01:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I saw that he was on their roster, but the Hanshin Tigers' roster appears to be very large (~70 players) and I'm guessing that there must be a smaller "active" roster. Appearing on a roster doesn't meet the notability criteria—both WP:ATHLETE and Wikipedia:WikiProject Baseball#Players require that a person actually plays at least one game at the specified level. BRMo (talk) 03:12, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
The Japanese League question is really irrelevant since he has played in the highest baseball league of his native land - Venezuela. Players who have played in the highest league of their homelands have always been considered notable on Wikipedia. See for example: Daniel Maddy-Weitzman and Roel de Mon. Kinston eagle (talk) 03:57, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
The Venezuelan League is part of Minor League Baseball and he played there while he was under a major league or minor league contract. Hence, my understanding is that he had to get his team's permission to play there and he was subject to the major league team's supervision. That seems more like a situation of training and development (i.e., minor leagues) than a fully professional league. Japan, on the other hand, is fully independent of Major League Baseball. BRMo (talk) 04:16, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
......and there's no source that he even played in Venezuela. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Actually there is. I already gave it above, but here it is again: [4] Kinston eagle (talk) 12:21, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
Venezuelan Professional Baseball League, which apparently is his claim to notability, is the winter league of United States Minor league baseball as the article on the league clearly asserts. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 15:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —brewcrewer (yada, yada) 01:58, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep per various arguments already presented. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 03:59, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete barring some evidence that he played in at least one game in a major league or other non trivial coverage. Beeblbrox (talk) 19:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • The Japanese league would obviously confer notability and it's terribly US-centric to say otherwise. That said, if no appearances in Nippon Pro Baseball can be verified, then the article should be deleted. matt91486 (talk) 00:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Nippon Professional Baseball is notable, top level in Japan. Highest level does not mean Major League Baseball. It means a fully professional league, which NPB is. --Borgardetalk 10:13, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sendai Habitat

Sendai Habitat (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

This article is about a charity initiative that lacks reliable sources. A search for coverage on this iniative shows no news coverage and a web search finds many wiki mirrors but no sources. The content of article is essentially an organisation web site and not an encyclopedia article. Removal of the image galleries and whatnot would leave an unverifiable stub with no notability. Whpq (talk) 15:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —Fg2 (talk) 10:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak delete I was thinking of suggesting a removal of the fotoblog-like descriptions of the various projects by the organisation, but that would indeed leave only a stub with no sources to back it up... TomorrowTime (talk) 11:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tomorrow is the Another Day

Tomorrow is the Another Day (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Lacks notability per WP:MUSIC. Fleetflame 03:08, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Section ten of WP:MUSIC reads, "But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article." Yes, the band's other two albums have articles, but they haven't been around long and shouldn't be here--they probably just got overlooked. I would put any information relevant to this album in No Regret Life. Fleetflame 04:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
In the case that the separate articles on the other two albums are to be questioned as well, then I would agree on the deletion. The only reason I created the article in the first place was because of the existence of the other articles, so if you say that they shouldn't exist in the first place I see no reason for my article to remain as is. I would be more than willing to incorporate the content in the separate articles on the main one. - Aurum Auriga —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aurum auriga (talk • contribs) 04:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I've merged the other two album articles into No Regret Life. Fleetflame 00:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —Fg2 (talk) 00:31, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge/Redirect all their albums to No Regret Life. --DAJF (talk) 00:49, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge/Redirect - per WP:BEFORE. - Neier (talk) 13:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ningen

Ningen (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Speculation on the existence of a legendary creature. Only one reference that does not appear to be reliable. TN‑X-Man 20:49, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Very strong keep It's an article about a Cryptid, we have many such articles, and is not speculation on its existence. It's just documenting what the cryptid is supposed to look like, the legends about it etc. The User who created this said in his edit summary that it is work in progress, and that means there will be more edits to it. You didn't even leave him 10 minutes to expand, you could have at least waited a few hours and see what would happen. If that's now biting nothing is. Articles don't spring fully formed from nowhere...--Phoenix-wiki 21:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you. Remilo (talk) 23:02, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge to mermaid(see below)Delete unless stronger sources can be found. Right now all that's there are some "artists' impressions", and if that's all that can be gotten, this cryptid isn't going anywhere.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 21:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete unless reliable sources can be found. --Snigbrook (talk) 22:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
I plan on continuing the article, and I have other reliable sources for future paragraphs. Remilo (talk) 23:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. The above keep arguements have convinced me that an article on this can exist, but the current one is pretty bad. It needs to be rewritten in an encyclopedic tone and could use some better references. I'd like to give the author and others more than just five days for these improvements, so a keep here shouldn't preclude later AfDs if problems cannot be solved. Cheers. --lifebaka (Talk - Contribs) 23:56, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —Fg2 (talk) 00:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete No evidence this is widely noted in independent, reliable sources (WP:NOTNESSIE). Gwen Gale (talk) 01:57, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
The article has had a lot of information added to it since the deletion tag was first put up. More information will also be added in the next few days. Remilo (talk) 02:48, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Very Strong Delete - article is pure nonsense. References are a joke. All google results appear to be anime related --T-rex 03:49, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Article is not nonsense. There are several popular manga and movies that contain the word Ningen, because it translates to human, which is a wildly used word.Remilo (talk) 11:37, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Stronger-than-any-of-the-people-above delete, at least till credible sources are provided. Ningen is indeed the standard Japanese word for human. It's used a little more broadly, for some applications where English would use person and the like. It's normally written 人間, not ニンゲン; but as ニンゲン is katakana it's acceptable (as is にんげん). Japanese Wikipedia redirects ニンゲン to 人間, explained as human; it also has a disambiguation page for 人間, which doesn't mention this. The sources given for this article are underwhelming. (Actually they're not sources in the normal sense: at least one of them is translated to form this article, which thus might, strictly speaking, violate copyright.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Hey hey ningen sucker, ah ningen ningen Delete (If you want a reason, I've read the article, and I can't believe people are taking it seriously for a moment. It's nonsense.) JuJube (talk) 11:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Very Strong Keep This article was marked for deletion when it was only one paragraph long, and had only one source. Since the article has been expanded and had a lot more information and sources in it I think it should no longer be subject for deletion. When writing the article I made sure to say that it might exist, and that they were alleged photos. Phrases that keep the story neutral, true and correct under the Wikipedia:five pillars. Also the article is not "speculation" as Tnxman307 said.Remilo (talk) 12:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Note: I've stricken out the duplicate !votes by User:Remilo. You get only one, Remilo. Deor (talk) 12:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Changed so they are no longer votes. Remilo (talk) 13:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as failing WP:V unless some actual reliable sources are found. Discussion-board posts (and copy/pastes of same on other Web sites) don't cut the mustard. Deor (talk) 12:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Do not delete for a week than come back and review.If reliable sources are not found then delete.Basically, delay postpone deletion for now until article has had time to improve.Xp54321 (Hello!,Contribs) 20:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment I'm keeping my vote as a delete. The sources that are currently cited (blogs and forum posts), are not reliable sources no matter how much you stretch it. So far this is just a vague rumor going around some forums. Not wide-spread enough to meet the inclusion criteria.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 17:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Suggestion I suggest that instead of keeping or deleting the article, that it is moved. Since essentially it is a giant Antarctic mermaid, I suggest it is made as a section in the mermaid article. Some of the sources are reliable, and if the information stated from the other sources is also on those pages, then that only those are kept, and all other sources deleted. If the information from the other sources is NOT in the reliable sources, then the rest is deleted. Remilo (talk) 20:45, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge to mermaid per Remilo.--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 21:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment. Umm, I've read this article and I've read Mermaid, and, frankly, I don't see any connection at all. What makes you think that would be a good merge target? Deor (talk) 22:35, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment (or should I say "very strong comment"?): Still not worthy of being merged anywhere. A week ago, Remilo wrote above: I plan on continuing the article, and I have other reliable sources for future paragraphs. So where are these sources? Right now we read: Recently in the Antarctic Ocean, some research was done. The Japanese government called for scientific whaling, and they may have found something. A report containing a possibly real photo was leaked onto the internet. The report claimed [blah blah blah]. (I'll forgo comment on the wonderful Japanese euphemism of "scientific whaling".) So what is the title of this report? Where was/is it linked on the internet? (Give us a URL.) And what credible news source -- something like Asahi Shinbun, Mainichi Shinbun, Yomiuri Shinbun or Nihon Keizai Shinbun, as opposed to some supōtsu shinbun, weekly magazine featuring girls spilling out of undersized bikinis, blog, private Geocities site, etc. -- reports on this report and treats it as at least probably genuine, as opposed to a hoax? (NB I'm not expecting evidence that this antarctic beastie is genuine, merely evidence that the evidence for it is taken at all seriously by a nontrivial number of sane, sober, educated adults.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:42, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shojo

Shojo (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

I don't see any good reason for this article to be in Wikipedia. It is all about descriptions on the Japanese term for 'virgin' unlike Shōjo. Appletrees (talk) 05:28, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep. They are not even the same word. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:04, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:06, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
    • Commment I already acknowledge that these two words are not even the same word and have different Chinese characters. However, what else the shojo has in the article? Virgin? Wikipedia is not a dictionary. --Appletrees (talk) 06:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
      • The article actually goes into more detail than a simple dicdef. And I changed my mind based on the Japanese article: I recommend redirecting this article to Virginity, which is where the interwiki link on the Japanese article goes. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Answer me this: does wikipedia have articles such as this one for any other language? TomorrowTime (talk) 06:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
    • I don't think so, which is why I recommended redirecting it. Another possible redirect (which may be even better than my first suggested target) is to Shōjo (disambiguation), and place an entry on the list of possibilities. ···日本穣? · Talk to Nihonjoe 07:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
That could be a win-win solution, yes. Get rid of the article about a Japanese word that never even entered the English language, and keep some of the information. TomorrowTime (talk) 07:21, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Shōjo and tag it with {{R from title without diacritics}}. As shojo (virginity) is not a English term, adding it to {{wiktionarypar}} in Shōjo (disambiguation) is probably enough. --Kusunose 07:49, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment I noticed these two articles a few weeks ago and was a little confused. Mainly because when someone uses the romanized term shojo in the English language, they are always referring to a young girl but not necessarily a virgin. So are shojo (処女) and shojo (少女) pronounced differently? If not, then shojo (処女) should probably be included as a footnote to shojo (少女). --Farix (Talk) 13:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect (Addendum) While looking at the articles that link to Shojo, all of them are referring to the term for "young girl" or the shōjo demographic, but it is not being used to refer to a "virgin girl". So restoring the redirect to Shōjo would be perfectly fine while including the above footnote. --Farix (Talk) 14:02, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Transfer to Wiktionary the obvious solution for a dictionary definition. As for incoming links that have the wrong meaning, they should be corrected to go to the right article. The words shojo and shōjo have very different meanings and, to a Japanese speaker, distinctly different pronunciations, and it is good to get the links to go directly to the right article. In addition to transferring to Wiktionary, put an entry on "Shōjo (disambiguation)" as Nihonjoe suggested. Fg2 (talk) 02:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Shōjo, as that's what wiktionary indicates, and since people can't type weird diacritics anyways, it should be redirected. 70.51.10.156 (talk) 07:18, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dan Dan Kokoro Hikareteku

Dan Dan Kokoro Hikareteku (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Fails WP:MUSIC, unnotable song. Notability of the anime series it is used as an ending theme for is not inherited. Failed PROD. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:59, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. -- -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge to Field of View. A redirect to the group or other appropriate target is the normal dispostion for songs under WP:MUSIC, and it seems likely to me that a reasonable number of those searching for this song will be doing so after discovering the anime, so mention of it is appropriate in the band's article. Actually, if this weren't at AfD I'd do a merge/redirect now. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 21:18, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Field of View, song fails WP:MUSIC.  Esradekan Gibb  "Talk" 00:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong keep - it does not fail WP:MUSIC, because it has been performed by at least 2 notable artists, namely, Field of View and the more popular Zard. Also, it appears that the nominator has not done her research - the song is used as an opening theme, not an ending theme, for one of the most popular anime series worldwide of all time - Dragon Ball (GT). This further solidifies its notability. In addition, the song has been translated to many languages; I can't give a precise figure, but I'd guess at least 20 languages. The song was also released as a single by Field of View. Moreover, even if it somehow failed WP:MUSIC, WP:MUSIC is non-binding and common sense overrides it. I think the above points are enough to assert its notability. -- Ynhockey (Talk) 08:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Another thing - this is one of those cases where the song is much more notable than the artist, so if anything, merging it into the artist's article would be a strange course of action. And by the way, although these are not indications of notability, there are 2 more arguments: one, the search "Dan dan kokoro" produced almost 30,000 hits on Google, and two, other Dragon Ball opening themes have articles which aren't being AfD'd by Collectonian, like Cha-La Head-Cha-La and We Gotta Power -- Ynhockey (Talk) 08:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: I have notified 2 users who contributed to this article of the debate - Collectonian also notified the user Hatto, thinking he created the article (although he did not).Ynhockey (Talk) 08:40, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
A few notes. I didn't notice, Twinkle did. That's who it read as the article creator. For the other Dragon Ball openings, I hadn't gotten to them yet as I'm on clean of GT first. Tackling the entire Dragon Ball series at once would be insane. However, since you pointed them out, I will AfD them since I am guessing by your noting them you will deprod them as you did this one (and interesting you didn't note the two other Dragon Ball themes for the series that I did put up for deletion)? Finally, it does fail WP:MUSIC. The series is a theme (and it was used as the ending for the last episode, so only partially wrong). There is no notability. 30,000 come download a copyright infringing copy of the song, or here are copyrighted lyrics, and here are a bunch of unreliable sources is not a sign of notability. Xymmax, now you see why I did the AfD route :-P -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 13:17, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Heh, you got me there :) Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 13:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
    • (EC) Comment: Is the song really more popular than the group? This is an honest question, I don't know the answer. I can't find any evidence that the song charted or anything, although my Japanese is weak. If it has, obviously a better case could be made for its notability. I also considered that the song had been covered by Zard (if covered is the right term since she wrote it). In the end, I just wasn't convinced that the two recording alone made it notable, especially since the second one was by the song's author. I considered the merge targets quite a bit, as Zard certainly is far more popular. In the end I suggested Field of View because they first recorded the song. I wouldn't really have any heartburn with merging to Zard, but perhaps Izumi Sakai would be even better, since she wrote the song in her individual capacity separate from her band. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 13:33, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
What about the fact that it was translated into many languages? This is an important notability gauge for novels, so why not songs? -- Ynhockey (Talk) 09:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
Nothing in WP:MUSIC gives it such an exception, and really I can't see why that would. Songs are short, so they are often translated into other languages (unlike novels). Fans translate nearly every song from anime series all the time. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment I'm not sure where you see in Wikipedia:Notability (books) that novels that have been translated in several languages are presumed to be notable. But clearly, translation is not a factor in a songs notability. --Farix (Talk) 17:18, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete or Redirect to Field of View. The song clearly fails WP:MUSIC. And from my understanding, it has to be performed independently by several notable artists, bands, or groups before it can be presumed notable. The performance by Zard is neither independent nor does it constitute several. --Farix (Talk) 17:03, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep notable single by a notable pop act used in several contexts and covered by another group. Ford MF (talk) 22:48, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - High profile single for a highly notable anime series, performed by 2 different artists, translated into various languages. Article could/should be expanded about these rather than deleted. JaakobouChalk Talk 17:19, 13 June 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Categories

  • Add categories here using the {{cl|CATEGORY}} template



[edit] Images

[edit] Templates

  • Add templates here using the {{tl|TEMPLATE}} template

[edit] Proposed deletion

  • Add PROD articles here
This project article is part of WikiProject Japan. Click here for more information.