- 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. Unanimous consensus to keep, including the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ifnord ( talk) 23:02, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- 2021 All Japan Artistic Gymnastics Championships ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
unreliable sources, WP:TOOSOON Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 07:39, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 07:39, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 07:39, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I would argue it is not WP:TOOSOON as most of the event has taken place already. The sourcing isn't great, but there appear to be a bit of sourcing in Japanese. The best I've found so far are [1] and [2] however that's really not enough to yet pass WP:RS. I don't speak any Japanese, but it seems that there might be notability in Japanese sources. snood1205( Say Hi! (talk)) 22:32, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment The sources are absolutely reliable. This is a domestic gymnastics competition in Japan and the links are from the official website of Japan Gymnastics Association. There’re lots of information there: qualification criteria, schedule, ticket information, broadcasting, results...They are more than enough, right? Or is it compulsory to have English sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NguyenDuyAnh1995 ( talk • contribs) 06:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment It is okay, but unless a japanese speaking person comes, we cann't be sure. -- Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 06:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Just copy the link to Google search and click "translate this page" at the result. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NguyenDuyAnh1995 ( talk • contribs) 16:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Weak Keep sources are not "independent of the subject" Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 06:42, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy keep The nominator has !voted "weak keep". I'm not entirely sure what happened here, but an article currently citing unreliable sources is not a deletion rationale, and an article on an ongoing sporting event is hardly "too soon" (even if it is poorly written and appears to refer twn December 2021 in the past tense). Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 14:09, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- Confusing reasons So when the article is nominated in delation, I asked for the reasons. The nominator first said that lots of emptiness, even though I just created it for one day and filled the contents whenever I have free time. I understand that too soon means that it looks like a draft, but despite that most of its contents are no longer empty for days, the too soon reminder still exists. The next reason is unreliable sources and when I explained that this is a Japanese gymnastics competition and the sources are from the official website of Japan Gymnastics Association, where all information about the tournament, i.e. qualification criteria, schedule, ticket information, broadcasting, results... The nominator said that they were okay but “unless a japanese speaking person comes, we cann't be sure”. And until a few days later he added that the sources are not “independent sources” to the subjects. I mean, after reading what it is, I get that third-party sources are encouraged to prevent biased and personal opinions of editors, but should such reason be announced from the beginning? I asked just a few hours after the article had been nominated for delation and this is day 5 or 6? I mean come on, give us all the mistakes needed to be corrected so we can fixed it, not confusing, unclear reasons! We editors don’t know all the rules but when you nominated an article for delation, you should have given specific and comprehensive reasons for that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NguyenDuyAnh1995 ( talk • contribs) 06:35, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment @ Leomk0403: You voted weak keep, does that mean you are withdrawing your nomination? Jumpytoo Talk 21:45, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment not yet, waiting for reliable sources to come in, some that i can read. Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 02:08, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
10:54, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment There’s no rule that requires the sources to be in English. I already said the article was about a gymnastics tournament in Japan and the sources were from the official website of Japan Gymnastics Association. What can be more reliable than that? The fact that you don’t understand Japanese is not the reason to mark my sources as unreliable. You can just copy the links to google and click on the Translate this page right next to the results and it will translate to the language that you desire. There are many ways to understand articles not writing in your languages without taking too much time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NguyenDuyAnh1995 ( talk • contribs) 13:34, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
- Why on Earth was this relisted? The only person calling for deletion (but hedging his bets) is doing so for the obviously invalid reason that he, like me, cannot read Japanese. Phil Bridger ( talk)
- 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.
- 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. Unanimous consensus to keep, including the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ifnord ( talk) 23:02, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- 2021 All Japan Artistic Gymnastics Championships ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
unreliable sources, WP:TOOSOON Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 07:39, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 07:39, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 07:39, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I would argue it is not WP:TOOSOON as most of the event has taken place already. The sourcing isn't great, but there appear to be a bit of sourcing in Japanese. The best I've found so far are [1] and [2] however that's really not enough to yet pass WP:RS. I don't speak any Japanese, but it seems that there might be notability in Japanese sources. snood1205( Say Hi! (talk)) 22:32, 22 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment The sources are absolutely reliable. This is a domestic gymnastics competition in Japan and the links are from the official website of Japan Gymnastics Association. There’re lots of information there: qualification criteria, schedule, ticket information, broadcasting, results...They are more than enough, right? Or is it compulsory to have English sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by NguyenDuyAnh1995 ( talk • contribs) 06:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment It is okay, but unless a japanese speaking person comes, we cann't be sure. -- Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 06:51, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Just copy the link to Google search and click "translate this page" at the result. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NguyenDuyAnh1995 ( talk • contribs) 16:53, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- Weak Keep sources are not "independent of the subject" Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 06:42, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
- Speedy keep The nominator has !voted "weak keep". I'm not entirely sure what happened here, but an article currently citing unreliable sources is not a deletion rationale, and an article on an ongoing sporting event is hardly "too soon" (even if it is poorly written and appears to refer twn December 2021 in the past tense). Hijiri 88 ( 聖 やや) 14:09, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
- Confusing reasons So when the article is nominated in delation, I asked for the reasons. The nominator first said that lots of emptiness, even though I just created it for one day and filled the contents whenever I have free time. I understand that too soon means that it looks like a draft, but despite that most of its contents are no longer empty for days, the too soon reminder still exists. The next reason is unreliable sources and when I explained that this is a Japanese gymnastics competition and the sources are from the official website of Japan Gymnastics Association, where all information about the tournament, i.e. qualification criteria, schedule, ticket information, broadcasting, results... The nominator said that they were okay but “unless a japanese speaking person comes, we cann't be sure”. And until a few days later he added that the sources are not “independent sources” to the subjects. I mean, after reading what it is, I get that third-party sources are encouraged to prevent biased and personal opinions of editors, but should such reason be announced from the beginning? I asked just a few hours after the article had been nominated for delation and this is day 5 or 6? I mean come on, give us all the mistakes needed to be corrected so we can fixed it, not confusing, unclear reasons! We editors don’t know all the rules but when you nominated an article for delation, you should have given specific and comprehensive reasons for that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NguyenDuyAnh1995 ( talk • contribs) 06:35, 27 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment @ Leomk0403: You voted weak keep, does that mean you are withdrawing your nomination? Jumpytoo Talk 21:45, 28 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment not yet, waiting for reliable sources to come in, some that i can read. Leomk ( Don't shout here, Shout here!) 02:08, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Sandstein
10:54, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
- Comment There’s no rule that requires the sources to be in English. I already said the article was about a gymnastics tournament in Japan and the sources were from the official website of Japan Gymnastics Association. What can be more reliable than that? The fact that you don’t understand Japanese is not the reason to mark my sources as unreliable. You can just copy the links to google and click on the Translate this page right next to the results and it will translate to the language that you desire. There are many ways to understand articles not writing in your languages without taking too much time! — Preceding unsigned comment added by NguyenDuyAnh1995 ( talk • contribs) 13:34, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
- Why on Earth was this relisted? The only person calling for deletion (but hedging his bets) is doing so for the obviously invalid reason that he, like me, cannot read Japanese. Phil Bridger ( talk)
- 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.