- 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. Although some rewriting may be warranted still based on the comments. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 08:33, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Japanese swords in fiction ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Mostly unreferenced essay of original research. Of the 6 sources:
- Very likely RS, but for real-world background in a book that very likely does not discuss Japanese swords in fiction.
- A page on a site that sells replica swords. Mentions popular culture only in the last sentence. Dubious reliability.
- Primary source for an example, for a sentence that lists other examples.
- A 2005 press release for an English translation of Rurouni Kenshin for a statement about a specific fictional weapon in that work.
- Passing mention of the example in an academic paper about something else.
- Primary-source episode guide.
In other words, none discuss the topic in depth. No other attempt to establish notability is made, and the topic appears to fail WP:GNG. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 23:53, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. --Animalparty! ( talk) 00:06, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. --Animalparty! ( talk) 00:06, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Neutral - I created this article 12 years ago as a way of removing anime, manga, and film discussions from the katana article, where I didn't think they belonged. I really don't care if this article is deleted or not, as long as deletion doesn't cause anime/manga content to be gradually re-added to the katana article. -- JHP ( talk) 00:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- The way I see it is that Wikipedians like to write about stuff they care about. Some Wikipedians care about katanas in fiction—perhaps more than care about real katanas. If they don't have this article as an outlet for their interests, they may start writing about anime, manga, and film katanas in the katana article again, which should be about real katanas. So this rather junky "Japanese swords in fiction" article exists solely as a way of protecting the more important katana article from the junk. Perhaps Wikipedia has better procedures for keeping junk out of articles in 2018 than it did in 2006. (Not sure.) Just please be aware of the potential unintended consequences if voting to delete this article. Thanks. -- JHP ( talk) 00:39, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Per general cultural knowledge, I think it's quite obviously a notable topic - i.e. there should be sources out there that would establish notability, if anyone cares to go find them. That would be better than wiping out the article. K. Bog 06:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: A couple books that may be useful in improving this article:
- Additionally, there may be some academic articles about the topic. ··· 日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:17, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 06:09, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 06:09, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 06:53, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 06:53, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Articles can be improved, topic is notable. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 08:39, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep: I certainly don't think it's a stretch to call this a notable topic, I would also agree that the article needs better citation and is an unreferenced WP:OR essay. To delete it would be to delete an article covering a notable topic with potential to be a just as good as anything else on Wikipedia. Basically, it needs work. Grapefruit17 ( talk) 14:48, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NUKEANDPAVE. There is nothing of value in this version of the article. None of the sources talk about Japanese swords in fiction, but rather are just a synthesis of random sources about anime and swords. – FenixFeather (talk) (Contribs) 18:25, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. This is actually a reasonably well organized article, appropriately dealing in an encyclopedic manner with material that would otherwise be dispersed among inappropriate trivia sections. DGG ( talk ) 05:04, 16 September 2018 (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.
- 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. Although some rewriting may be warranted still based on the comments. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk, contributions) 08:33, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Japanese swords in fiction ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Mostly unreferenced essay of original research. Of the 6 sources:
- Very likely RS, but for real-world background in a book that very likely does not discuss Japanese swords in fiction.
- A page on a site that sells replica swords. Mentions popular culture only in the last sentence. Dubious reliability.
- Primary source for an example, for a sentence that lists other examples.
- A 2005 press release for an English translation of Rurouni Kenshin for a statement about a specific fictional weapon in that work.
- Passing mention of the example in an academic paper about something else.
- Primary-source episode guide.
In other words, none discuss the topic in depth. No other attempt to establish notability is made, and the topic appears to fail WP:GNG. – LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄) 23:53, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. --Animalparty! ( talk) 00:06, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. --Animalparty! ( talk) 00:06, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Neutral - I created this article 12 years ago as a way of removing anime, manga, and film discussions from the katana article, where I didn't think they belonged. I really don't care if this article is deleted or not, as long as deletion doesn't cause anime/manga content to be gradually re-added to the katana article. -- JHP ( talk) 00:16, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- The way I see it is that Wikipedians like to write about stuff they care about. Some Wikipedians care about katanas in fiction—perhaps more than care about real katanas. If they don't have this article as an outlet for their interests, they may start writing about anime, manga, and film katanas in the katana article again, which should be about real katanas. So this rather junky "Japanese swords in fiction" article exists solely as a way of protecting the more important katana article from the junk. Perhaps Wikipedia has better procedures for keeping junk out of articles in 2018 than it did in 2006. (Not sure.) Just please be aware of the potential unintended consequences if voting to delete this article. Thanks. -- JHP ( talk) 00:39, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Per general cultural knowledge, I think it's quite obviously a notable topic - i.e. there should be sources out there that would establish notability, if anyone cares to go find them. That would be better than wiping out the article. K. Bog 06:05, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
- Comment: A couple books that may be useful in improving this article:
- Additionally, there may be some academic articles about the topic. ··· 日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:17, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 06:09, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 06:09, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 06:53, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 06:53, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Articles can be improved, topic is notable. ηoian ‡orever ηew ‡rontiers 08:39, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep: I certainly don't think it's a stretch to call this a notable topic, I would also agree that the article needs better citation and is an unreferenced WP:OR essay. To delete it would be to delete an article covering a notable topic with potential to be a just as good as anything else on Wikipedia. Basically, it needs work. Grapefruit17 ( talk) 14:48, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per WP:NUKEANDPAVE. There is nothing of value in this version of the article. None of the sources talk about Japanese swords in fiction, but rather are just a synthesis of random sources about anime and swords. – FenixFeather (talk) (Contribs) 18:25, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. This is actually a reasonably well organized article, appropriately dealing in an encyclopedic manner with material that would otherwise be dispersed among inappropriate trivia sections. DGG ( talk ) 05:04, 16 September 2018 (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.