- 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 delete. based on the strength of the delete arguments: 1E applies, and while he may have done this to himself, the BLP policy starts with a basic presumption of privacy. Given what the article is focused on, deleting until notability is proven under our policies and guidelines is the most conservative option. TonyBallioni ( talk) 16:51, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Mao Sugiyama ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Notability concerns. The WP:MILL coverage of an egregiously blatant publicity stunt doesn't make a person notable, and there are WP:BEANS reasons to discourage this as a path to notability. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 05:19, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 05:24, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 05:24, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment this guy really had balls to do that.
104.163.139.33 (
talk)
06:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- also, Delete. 100% of coverage is for the single event. 104.163.139.33 ( talk) 06:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Whatever that we may think about what he did, he has enough coverage in reliable sources [1] [2] [3] [4], and collaborated with other artists - [5] [6] as Yuma Hamasaqi. I don't think WP:MILL (what he did is not run-of-the-mill, nor is the coverage) or WP:BEANS (people are more likely to read about it in mainstream media than go looking for him here) is relevant here. Hzh ( talk) 15:54, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Wikipedia is not meant to be an odd collection of trivia. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 01:15, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:31, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:31, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:19, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:19, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- If this is the one thing the fellow's known for, delete. — Javert2113 ( Let's chat!) 18:30, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete/Re-name WP:1EVENT would seem to apply - certainly that event looks like it would have notability. I suppose we could re-name it and tweak it, I'd be happy enough to do that if people were minded. Nosebagbear ( talk) 18:59, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Merge – While rare, this is not unheard of in the literature. For a similar case which does have notability on its own, see Armin Meiwes. The content here doesn't appear to rise to that level of notability, but could be merged somewhere. A search for anthropophagous paraphilia at Google books and Scholar both turn up serious references. List of paraphilias currently lists Anthropophagy but that entry is currently piped to Cannibalism, although the latter topic is far more than just the paraphilic practice, which the Cannibalism article barely discusses. If vorarephilia has its own article, then surely Anthrophagy could. But if no one volunteers to write it, the content of Mao Sugiyama could be merged to Cannibalism and the title become a redirect to a section there. Mathglot ( talk) 21:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Also agree with Nosebagbear that this is clearly WP:1EVENT. - AuthorAuthor ( talk) 00:46, 14 June 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 delete. based on the strength of the delete arguments: 1E applies, and while he may have done this to himself, the BLP policy starts with a basic presumption of privacy. Given what the article is focused on, deleting until notability is proven under our policies and guidelines is the most conservative option. TonyBallioni ( talk) 16:51, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
- Mao Sugiyama ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Notability concerns. The WP:MILL coverage of an egregiously blatant publicity stunt doesn't make a person notable, and there are WP:BEANS reasons to discourage this as a path to notability. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 05:19, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 05:24, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 05:24, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Comment this guy really had balls to do that.
104.163.139.33 (
talk)
06:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- also, Delete. 100% of coverage is for the single event. 104.163.139.33 ( talk) 06:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Whatever that we may think about what he did, he has enough coverage in reliable sources [1] [2] [3] [4], and collaborated with other artists - [5] [6] as Yuma Hamasaqi. I don't think WP:MILL (what he did is not run-of-the-mill, nor is the coverage) or WP:BEANS (people are more likely to read about it in mainstream media than go looking for him here) is relevant here. Hzh ( talk) 15:54, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Wikipedia is not meant to be an odd collection of trivia. John Pack Lambert ( talk) 01:15, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:31, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:31, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:19, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:19, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- If this is the one thing the fellow's known for, delete. — Javert2113 ( Let's chat!) 18:30, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete/Re-name WP:1EVENT would seem to apply - certainly that event looks like it would have notability. I suppose we could re-name it and tweak it, I'd be happy enough to do that if people were minded. Nosebagbear ( talk) 18:59, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
- Merge – While rare, this is not unheard of in the literature. For a similar case which does have notability on its own, see Armin Meiwes. The content here doesn't appear to rise to that level of notability, but could be merged somewhere. A search for anthropophagous paraphilia at Google books and Scholar both turn up serious references. List of paraphilias currently lists Anthropophagy but that entry is currently piped to Cannibalism, although the latter topic is far more than just the paraphilic practice, which the Cannibalism article barely discusses. If vorarephilia has its own article, then surely Anthrophagy could. But if no one volunteers to write it, the content of Mao Sugiyama could be merged to Cannibalism and the title become a redirect to a section there. Mathglot ( talk) 21:59, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Also agree with Nosebagbear that this is clearly WP:1EVENT. - AuthorAuthor ( talk) 00:46, 14 June 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.