Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Japan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion and merging of articles related to Japan. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not 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. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. 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. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Japan|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Japan. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
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.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch
Scan for Japan-related AfDs

Scan for Japan-related Prods
Scan for Japan-related template TfDs

See also:



Japan

[edit]
Mobile Suit Gundam RG: XARX-ZERO (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I propose draftifying because this is clearly WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL . All sources are just churnalism of the same comic con announcement. WP:PRIMARY. I'm not seeing any reliable, secondary coverage of the subject that confirms production has actually begun. Should be incubated in draftspace until we get more info. Sulfurboy (talk) 03:36, 27 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Masayuki Kojima (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsourced WP:BLP. Fails WP:SIGCOV, WP:BIO. scope_creepTalk 20:49, 26 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Keep though he does need sources - added a few myself, and i think he should stay tagged as undersourced - but he clearly passes WP:NCREATIVE through directing (generally considered as creator) 10+ notable works Jishara (talk) 22:09, 26 July 2026 (UTC)reply
If its kept, anything that is unsourced will be removed. Wikipedia isn't a forum or blog or substack. scope_creepTalk 22:56, 26 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Not one of these references support a WP:BLP here dude. There is no bypassing policy. BLP stated "Be very firm about the use of high-quality, reliable sources". These are not high quality sources. They fail WP:V, WP:SIGCOV. Only WP:SECONDARY sources can be used to prove notability on a BLP. This the second Afd that I've visited this morning where I've seen you trying to lower established standards on how policy is interpreted. scope_creepTalk 05:51, 28 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Azuki-chan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of significance. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creepTalk 20:48, 26 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Hi @Jumpytoo: How goes it. I didn't know it ran for that many episodes but magically it didn't have any references to inform me, as the reader. On WP:AFD the standard is WP:THREE reference to prove notability. Two is insufficient. Do you have a third reference to prove its notable? scope_creepTalk
Sources are presented by others below, but 2 sources can be enough depending on the circumstances, here the fact that it is a 110 episode NHK series & there is articles still being posted after airing make it near certain a 3rd source would exist in some offline source. Jumpytoo Talk 06:59, 28 July 2026 (UTC)reply
@Jumpytoo: WP:THREE is standard consensus. Your making assumptions, instead of relying on simple facts which is the core of Wikipedia. If you have a third reference, post it up. I see it ran for 110 episodes so is likely notable, but not all long running series are notable. It would be nice to have a third reference to add to the article so it doesn't come back here. scope_creepTalk 07:06, 28 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Keep per Jumpytoo - also, for clarity, WP:THREE is 1) an essay and not a policy and 2) about two or three, not only three. Jishara (talk) 03:06, 28 July 2026 (UTC)reply
@Jishara: No. Not about 2 or 3. Three. WP:THREE is consensus. It was voted on by more than 200 editors during summer 2023 in what started in a WP:RFA and ended up leading up to consensus that it was mandatory for WP:AFD. scope_creepTalk 05:42, 28 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Huh, hadn't heard that. Page lists itself as an essay and specifically states it's an essay and not a policy or representative of consensus It also states: 1) "This page in a nutshell: If you were sent here from a link in a WP:AfD, WP:AfC, or similar discussion, please consider it a request to post two or three, but no more...". anyway, we're getting a bit off topic - my vote remains Keep per Jumpytoo. Jishara (talk) 06:05, 28 July 2026 (UTC)reply
  • Keep per the sources provided. Also, with the significant anime adaptation, it meets WP:NBOOK criteria 3 ("The book has been considered by reliable sources to have made a significant contribution to ... a notable or significant motion picture"). Link20XX (talk) 02:58, 30 July 2026 (UTC)reply
T.O Entertainment (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Page for a defunct company that has a massive lack of references… SBF2004 (talk) 13:27, 24 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Kiyomi Takada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Takada is not notable enough for her own article. She appears in less than ten episodes, and has less screen time/plot significance than several other characters who lack articles of their own such as Near and Mikami. AxioChrono (talk) 14:42, 11 July 2026 (UTC)reply

Redirect to List of Death Note characters#Associates of Kira. YeetV4 (talk) 15:43, 11 July 2026 (UTC)reply
What about the manga? The second half of the manga was heavily cut down for the anime release Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 10:58, 13 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Currently, the sources suck as Comic Book Resources is unreliable, though these could be used; https://www.themarysue.com/women-of-death-note/ https://animatedtimes.com/death-note-creator-had-forgotten-all-about-the-only-other-character-besides-misa-amane-who-loved-light/ Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 11:02, 13 July 2026 (UTC)reply
https://fandomwire.com/i-do-not-hate-or-dislike-her-tsugumi-ohba-did-not-do-justice-to-this-death-note-character-who-became-forgettable/ Froglord (Finnfrog99) (talk) 11:05, 13 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Selective merge or just redirect....?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BhikhariInformer 📮 (Ping me or else I won't see it) 02:38, 19 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Comment: @AxioChrono:, the manga is the original medium of Death Note, not the anime. I think the rationale for deletion needs to seriously consider the character's role in the manga, which in many ways is more important than the anime, and my understanding is the Near/Mello arc is much more substantial in the original manga than in the anime. Would it be OK if you appraised Takada's role in the manga?
Note that this is not a keep vote. Even if her role is more substantial in the manga, we need sufficient secondary sources (the real arbiter of whether this should be a standalone article). One can check with Japanese sources on CiNii and see if any Japanese authors have written about Takada's role.
WhisperToMe (talk) 01:38, 21 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Keep because she has a more prominent role in the manga than in the anime. Hansen Sebastian (Talk) 06:34, 21 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:08, 27 July 2026 (UTC)reply
Strongly oppose, because the argument is way off-base. "They're less important than some other subjects that don't currently have a wikipedia article" is not an argument. Lacking articles is a random trivial irrelevant fact that just means nobody created the articles. If it was the case that those articles didn't exist for a principled articulable reason, that might be relevant, but the AfD motion didn't say anything like that.RandomEditor6772314 (talk) 03:00, 27 July 2026 (UTC)reply



Categories

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

Images

[edit]
  • Add images here using the [[:File:FILENAME]] semicolon to start the link

Templates

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

Redirects

[edit]
  • Add redirects here using the {{no redirect|REDIRECT}} template

Comment on the talk pages of the articles, not here. If you agree with the proposed deletion, you don't have to do anything. If you think the article merits keeping, then remove the {{prod}} template and make an effort to improve the article so that it clearly meets the notability and verifiability criteria.