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 entry in
WP:ANIME/RS is referring to the English website Manga Life, not the Japanese magazine. Specifically, it mentions Manga Life is good for reviews up until May 2011. This website was an offshoot of Comics Bulletin.JumpytooTalk21:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The further reading section has two links to Manga Life (which is a reliable source) as one review, and a reference to a Newtype USA review. While I do not have access to this source, I assume
good faith that the review is significant. That's two good sources, which fulfills the at least two requirement of
WP:NBOOK.
Link20XX (
talk)
02:45, 25 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a disagreement over the reliabiity of the sources and reviews offered. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!21:12, 26 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment After further investigation, I accept these reviews as RS. However, is that enough to establish notability? What is the notability standard specifically for manga/anime/manhwa, etc.?
Just Another Cringy Username (
talk)
20:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC)reply
WP:NBOOK#Coverage notes states that Though the concept of a "book" is widely defined, this guideline does not provide specific notability criteria for the following types of publications: comic books; graphic novels (although it does apply to manga), so there is no question that NBOOKS applies here (as for whether it applies to manhwa, manhua,
OEL manga, etc is not elaborated on, so I would assume it does not apply).
WP:NBOOKS#Criteria states that The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews.Manga Life is a review, and I assume Newtype USA is one as well, thus it is the subject of two or more non-trivial published works independent of the book itself, so it meets that criteria. Regarding the notability of anime, it depends; manga that are notable often contain information about their adaptations, as is common with other book articles. Anime may be eligible for
WP:NTV,
WP:NWEB, or
WP:NFILM depending on its method of distribution. The
general notability guideline also applies.
Link20XX (
talk)
23:31, 28 June 2023 (UTC)reply
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 entry in
WP:ANIME/RS is referring to the English website Manga Life, not the Japanese magazine. Specifically, it mentions Manga Life is good for reviews up until May 2011. This website was an offshoot of Comics Bulletin.JumpytooTalk21:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)reply
The further reading section has two links to Manga Life (which is a reliable source) as one review, and a reference to a Newtype USA review. While I do not have access to this source, I assume
good faith that the review is significant. That's two good sources, which fulfills the at least two requirement of
WP:NBOOK.
Link20XX (
talk)
02:45, 25 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting as there is a disagreement over the reliabiity of the sources and reviews offered. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk!21:12, 26 June 2023 (UTC)reply
Comment After further investigation, I accept these reviews as RS. However, is that enough to establish notability? What is the notability standard specifically for manga/anime/manhwa, etc.?
Just Another Cringy Username (
talk)
20:55, 28 June 2023 (UTC)reply
WP:NBOOK#Coverage notes states that Though the concept of a "book" is widely defined, this guideline does not provide specific notability criteria for the following types of publications: comic books; graphic novels (although it does apply to manga), so there is no question that NBOOKS applies here (as for whether it applies to manhwa, manhua,
OEL manga, etc is not elaborated on, so I would assume it does not apply).
WP:NBOOKS#Criteria states that The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works appearing in sources that are independent of the book itself. This can include published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, other books, television documentaries, bestseller lists, and reviews.Manga Life is a review, and I assume Newtype USA is one as well, thus it is the subject of two or more non-trivial published works independent of the book itself, so it meets that criteria. Regarding the notability of anime, it depends; manga that are notable often contain information about their adaptations, as is common with other book articles. Anime may be eligible for
WP:NTV,
WP:NWEB, or
WP:NFILM depending on its method of distribution. The
general notability guideline also applies.
Link20XX (
talk)
23:31, 28 June 2023 (UTC)reply
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.