Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karui Shosetsu Magazine
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Stifle (talk) 12:20, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Karui Shosetsu Magazine[edit]
- Karui Shosetsu Magazine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Self-published amateur anthology, page created by the guy running the anthology; does not meet notability requirements. Doceirias (talk) 06:06, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. —Doceirias (talk) 06:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: it started well under a year ago, and the number of issue(s) so far is one, and actually it's just something from a website, and Wikipedia is not a web directory, and--perhaps that's all that needs to be said. Morenoodles (talk) 06:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: Wikipedia may not be a web directory, however, the magazine is legitamate. It's the first of its kind in english, and has recieved NOTABLE coverage, such as from Anime News Network. The first issue has been downloaded almost 1,000 times and many blogs, forums, and websites across the world (including Japan) are discussing it. An argument made was that the article does not meet the notability requirements, however, after reading through them, I see nothing that the article does not meet. Just because its obscure and new, does not exempt it from being listed on wikipedia. And since LightNovel.org is not a company, and the magazine is not commerical, I see no reason why it should matter that I created the wiki page. If the article is unbiased and subjective, I see no reason why it should matter in any way. And just because it's only had one issue released (would have been more by now, had not some things come up) does not mean its not notable. I've seen manga before that only having a couple chapters serialzied in a manga magazine already had an established (small, but still existant) wiki page. I do not see in any way how the Karui Shosetsu Magazine should not be allowed to exist on wikipedia. Matt122004 (talk) 06:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC) — Matt122004 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Delete Where to begin.... Well I'll start with the beginning, the creation of the page (whatever it's content) fails Wp:CONFLICT. The ANN coverage is precisely one short news item (didn't check the forum, it doesn't affect notability) and 1000 downloads while not a small achivement, is hardly an arguement to prove notability - 1000 downloads is a very small number for downloads. It's irrelevant to wikipedia if people are talking about it on blogs and forums, neither have any impact on notability. Other stuff existing does not automatically mean this page should, wikipedia doensn't work like that and it doesn't strengthen your case (WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS) - quite the opposite really as several pages like you describe have been deleted this week. All the references are either 1st party, blogs or an illegal scanlation site, I can't find a single compelling reason to keep. Dandy Sephy (talk) 10:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete A thousand people isn't a lot. Webcomics with more hits than that don't get their own article. And you can't make an article for no other reason than to advertise yourself. Dream Focus (talk) 12:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:ADVERT, which is essentially the reason the article exists. The coverage and sources is entirely by blogs, which fail the reliable sources and verifiability guidelines. And there is also the issue of WP:CONFLICT. We're already finishing up the last instance of a group or company using Wikipedia as an advertising platform and the project is already working on the Weekly Shōnen Jump related manga articles. --Farix (Talk) 13:35, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above, all have been told. You don't come to wikipedia to get notability, you are notable then you have your place in wikipedia. KrebMarkt 16:56, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
KeepYou keep trying to argue that I am advertising, that I am spamming, that I am in a conflict of interest. But I completely dissagree. Sure, I maybe the one the runs it, but does that even matter? Instead of deleting, how about you make sure the article is UNBIASED and if it currently isn't, than tell me what to do to make it. As far as I know, it is currently. And honestly, how is it advertising? Cause seriously, the only people that will ever discover it are those who are SEARCHING for info about the magazine. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia for information. People, when they hear about it, will google for it. And most, would like it if there was a wiki page where they could read a reliable unbiased assesment of what the magazine is without having to download it to see. Instead of arguing over whether this article should be deleted, I believe it should be decided on what needs to be changed within it to make it acceptable. Matt122004 (talk) 22:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes it does matter, Wikipedia is not for placing your advert and its impossible to be unbiased and offer a neutral viewpoint. However its not just the conflict of interest, it's NOT notable, no matter how much you think it is. Google hits, blog sites and forums do not have any relevance here. Changing the article won't stop it failing other guidelines and policy. Having a wiki page won't make any difference to people searching for it, if people somehow stumble upon the magazine it will be on the official site and random google links, which will tell them all they need to know. When one of the biggest Anime + Manga sites going (and a reliable source in its own right) only mentions the magazine in passing, you are going to have a hard time proving notability. I'd be surprised if there are any truely notable OEL's full stop. I'm not sure why you are voting twice either... Dandy Sephy (talk) 22:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh sorry, I didn't know you weren't supposed to. Matt122004 (talk) 23:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete completely unnotable spam by fansite creator attempting to claim his site is a "magazine" and claiming that somehow makes it notable (it doesn't). There is also, to my knowledge, no such think as a OEL light novel at all. Impossible, really, considering what a light novel is. Those are basically just fan created novels, or graphic novel at best. Fails WP:N and obvious WP:COI and WP:ADVERT issues. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:53, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- First of all, your post is full of flaws. The site is NOT the magazine, if you had cared to investigate, the magazine is in a PDF file which you DOWNLOAD from the site. That is why we call it a Magazine, because we are trying to make the PDF as much like a magazine as we can. Your second point about there being no such thing possible as an OEL light novel makes ABSOLUTELY no sense whatsoever. A light novel is a novel which can be read in a single day (50,000 words or so or less) and which contains at least one anime/manga illustration (I reference the light novel WELCOME TO THE NHK) and has a storyline that COULD be turned into an anime or manga. How in the world is that IMPOSSIBLE for someone who speaks english to do?! Your comment makes no sense. All you got to do is get a writer and a anime artist, team them together, have a good story, and you have a light novel if it can be read all within a day. FAN CREATED NOVELS? Excuse me, that would be called FANFICTION, and again, you obviously cared not to investigate, or else you'd realize all the stories are completely ORIGINAL and have no ties to existing entities. Graphic novels? That would be comic books, which at the moment, we have not yet published. So, you might want to know what the heck you're talking about, before you decide to write the stuff like you just did. Matt122004 (talk) 01:43, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- the "potential" for becoming an anime or manga has little to do with anything, especially when you are talking about non-japanese publications. However Collectonian does have a point, an "OEL light novel" is a silly name. A light Novel is a Light Novel. Light Novel is just a term for short storys (or a series of short stories), the only difference is that not all english language novels contain illustrations (but many do, especially for younger audiences) which typical japanese light novels tend to. Calling something an "original english language light novel" is absurd. The term works for Manga because the "manga style" differs from traditional western comics, it doesn't work for light novels because they are just short storys. As such it's indeed impossible, and no random blog or forum post will convince me that this ridiculous labelling of such content is in any way sensible or justified Dandy Sephy (talk) 02:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- A light novel is NOT a short story or series of short stories. A light novel series, such as Shakugan no Shana which has reached over 20 volumes is just as long, if it were put all together into large books, as the Harry Potter series I'm sure. And you're right, a Light Novel is a light novel no matter what. HOWEVER, you referenced that there ARE book in english with illustrations. However, what you failed to mention is that a LIGHT NOVEL is a novel with Anime/Manga illustrations, and there are currently NO original english novels with such. And guess what, light novels have different storylines than american readers are used to, even the style of writing is different. So just the same, I have to say your wrong. Matt122004 (talk) 02:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- A light novel series, is still a series of short storys. They may be one plotline, but they are still broken up into smaller storys (perhaps not universally, but certainly enough to be woth noting). The length of the series is irrelevant, especially if it's taking that many more "volumes" to reach that size. You are also deliberately ignoring a point I've already made (after agreeing with me on the more important point!), the fact that illustrations are done manga style make ZERO difference and the same goes for storyline style. Shakespeare writes in a very different style to Stephen King, but they both wrote fiction. Also, there is a world of English speakers outside of America, so bear that in mind. Dandy Sephy (talk) 02:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Um, I'm sorry, but it actually DOES make a difference. Or have you never read the wikipedia entry for a light novel? It defines it as having anime/manga illustrations. That is exactly one of the most defining characteristics of these novels that distinguishes them from other short novels. And actually, your comparison fails. Shakespeare wrote PLAYS, while Stephen King wrote NOVELS. They are completely different, in writing style, and in format. Which is why Shakespeare is called a Playwright, and not a novelist. LIGHT NOVELS are very different format, style, and artwork wise then anything available in american or even english print. And guess what, does that mean then that Eragon is a series of 3 short stories? Does that mean Harry Potter is also a series of short stories? To call light novels short stories is a wrong use of the word. In order to be called a short story, you typically have a story lower than 35,000 words, which is usually lower than the average light novel word count. And I know that there is a world of english writers outside of America, many writers on the magazine and the artists coming in for the second issue don't live in america. Matt122004 (talk) 02:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, bad analogy. I can admit to that because they were the first two names that popped into my head. However you may want to read the light novel page yourself, it doesn't even mention illustrations, so maybe you should check your own claims too. Naturally a light novel created in japan for the Japanese market will have a manga illustration, it's unlikely to have a Stan Lee style illustration now isn't it? Thats just common sense. Using a manga style illustration in a original english story doesn't suddenly make it something new. If you want to continue the "debate" over our opposing viewpoints on the medium itself, lets take it elsewhere, but we've drifted away from the AFD and theres a feeling in my bones this may be speedy closed. Dandy Sephy (talk) 02:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, someone got rid of it. But originally wikipedia listed that it needed to have manga illustrations. Even websites have quoted wikipedia on it. Guess someone decided it wasn't needed. Anyways, lets end this debate with the feeling of "Lets agree to disagree" lol. Matt122004 (talk) 03:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Lots of confusion here, largely resulting from confusion over the term light novel in Japan. Illustrations are a big part of light novels, but there are any number of them without illustrations. Other people define them based on which publishing label the books are released from. But the one thing that is universally agreed upon is that they are the Japanese version of young adult novels. I would argue that a light novel written in English is simple a young adult novel - albeit one influenced by Japanese fiction. But like OEL manga, the term is a bit of a misnomer. Manga just means comics from Japan; fans with narrow reading tastes started treating it like an art style, which was a shame. It meant they ruled out lots of great manga as not looking enough like manga. I'd hate to see the same happen with light novels just because fans decided they had to have illustrations in that same narrowly defined style, or because the stories didn't fit the convential genres - even though the biggest light novel authors made a big splash upturning typical genres. Not to get wildly off topic or anything. Doceirias (talk) 05:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Also, Welcome to the NHK is not a light novel. Never has been. Published for an adult audience by a mainstream publishing label. Doceirias (talk) 05:36, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- It may never have meant to have been, but it is a novel you can read in a day, has an anime cover, and most light novel fans consider it a light novel. Matt122004 (talk) 06:34, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- My point is, light novel is a demographic term. Length has nothing to do with it, illustrated covers have nothing to do with it, and the opinions of fans who don't know better have nothing to do with it. They are light novels by virtue of the target audience. Just like Love Hina is never going to be shojo manga, no matter how romantic it is. Welcome to the NHK is an adult work of fiction, aimed at adults, that happens to deal with otaku subculture. Doceirias (talk) 03:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Hmm, someone got rid of it. But originally wikipedia listed that it needed to have manga illustrations. Even websites have quoted wikipedia on it. Guess someone decided it wasn't needed. Anyways, lets end this debate with the feeling of "Lets agree to disagree" lol. Matt122004 (talk) 03:10, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, bad analogy. I can admit to that because they were the first two names that popped into my head. However you may want to read the light novel page yourself, it doesn't even mention illustrations, so maybe you should check your own claims too. Naturally a light novel created in japan for the Japanese market will have a manga illustration, it's unlikely to have a Stan Lee style illustration now isn't it? Thats just common sense. Using a manga style illustration in a original english story doesn't suddenly make it something new. If you want to continue the "debate" over our opposing viewpoints on the medium itself, lets take it elsewhere, but we've drifted away from the AFD and theres a feeling in my bones this may be speedy closed. Dandy Sephy (talk) 02:52, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Um, I'm sorry, but it actually DOES make a difference. Or have you never read the wikipedia entry for a light novel? It defines it as having anime/manga illustrations. That is exactly one of the most defining characteristics of these novels that distinguishes them from other short novels. And actually, your comparison fails. Shakespeare wrote PLAYS, while Stephen King wrote NOVELS. They are completely different, in writing style, and in format. Which is why Shakespeare is called a Playwright, and not a novelist. LIGHT NOVELS are very different format, style, and artwork wise then anything available in american or even english print. And guess what, does that mean then that Eragon is a series of 3 short stories? Does that mean Harry Potter is also a series of short stories? To call light novels short stories is a wrong use of the word. In order to be called a short story, you typically have a story lower than 35,000 words, which is usually lower than the average light novel word count. And I know that there is a world of english writers outside of America, many writers on the magazine and the artists coming in for the second issue don't live in america. Matt122004 (talk) 02:39, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- A light novel series, is still a series of short storys. They may be one plotline, but they are still broken up into smaller storys (perhaps not universally, but certainly enough to be woth noting). The length of the series is irrelevant, especially if it's taking that many more "volumes" to reach that size. You are also deliberately ignoring a point I've already made (after agreeing with me on the more important point!), the fact that illustrations are done manga style make ZERO difference and the same goes for storyline style. Shakespeare writes in a very different style to Stephen King, but they both wrote fiction. Also, there is a world of English speakers outside of America, so bear that in mind. Dandy Sephy (talk) 02:31, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- A light novel is NOT a short story or series of short stories. A light novel series, such as Shakugan no Shana which has reached over 20 volumes is just as long, if it were put all together into large books, as the Harry Potter series I'm sure. And you're right, a Light Novel is a light novel no matter what. HOWEVER, you referenced that there ARE book in english with illustrations. However, what you failed to mention is that a LIGHT NOVEL is a novel with Anime/Manga illustrations, and there are currently NO original english novels with such. And guess what, light novels have different storylines than american readers are used to, even the style of writing is different. So just the same, I have to say your wrong. Matt122004 (talk) 02:22, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- the "potential" for becoming an anime or manga has little to do with anything, especially when you are talking about non-japanese publications. However Collectonian does have a point, an "OEL light novel" is a silly name. A light Novel is a Light Novel. Light Novel is just a term for short storys (or a series of short stories), the only difference is that not all english language novels contain illustrations (but many do, especially for younger audiences) which typical japanese light novels tend to. Calling something an "original english language light novel" is absurd. The term works for Manga because the "manga style" differs from traditional western comics, it doesn't work for light novels because they are just short storys. As such it's indeed impossible, and no random blog or forum post will convince me that this ridiculous labelling of such content is in any way sensible or justified Dandy Sephy (talk) 02:12, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Not-notable, all sources are either from the website itself or blog posts. Ryan4314 (talk) 11:46, 2 February 2009 (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.