Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Biggukatsu
- 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. sufficient consensus. I agree that perhaps the article should be moved as suggested, but I'm not making that part of the close DGG ( talk ) 16:41, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
- Biggukatsu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable product. Fails WP:GNG. No reliable sources . Vanjagenije (talk) 13:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep per the improvements by Margin1522. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 18:20, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Delete: it doesn't seem to be a product per se, since the article doesn't mention a specific manufacturer. However, it definitely fails GNG, since it isn't covered by any reliable sources. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 14:14, 11 January 2015 (UTC) - Keep – and move to "Big Katsu". This actually has an article on the Japanese Wikipedia. It's quite a popular kind of snack that has been available for decades from many manufacturers. I cleaned it up a bit and added a picture and a reference. There are five or six other references in the Japanese article, to Japanese books that are available at Amazon. So if someone wants to expand it there are plenty of RS references. – Margin1522 (talk) 15:08, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA1000 23:57, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA1000 23:57, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
- Keep per Margin1522, per the Japanese sources it does seem to be a significantly popular item in Japan. Nom only looked up English language name and didn't look up Japanese name as they should have. No need for systemic bias. --Oakshade (talk) 17:04, 12 January 2015 (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.