Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryosuke Fukamachi

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. In weighing the arguments, the WP:NBASE #2 argument is quite strong. I also note that Menaechmi's reading of that guideline is a clear misreading; the bit about whether statistics sites support notability is only applied in that guideline if a subject does not meet one of the criteria for NBASE. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 03:17, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ryosuke Fukamachi

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Meets athlete notability by appearing in a single game, but otherwise appears to not meet GNG. ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peador ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 20:06, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:07, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:07, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:09, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - meets WP:NBASEBALL criterion #2. Rlendog (talk) 20:59, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in view of WP:BIAS. If this were a Major League Baseball player, I could see a show cause (and am confident such a player would pass). But since he is from Japan, sources would likely be in Japanese. Not many English-speaking volunteer editors have the time and skill to find and properly evaluate sources. Therefore, WP:NBASEBALL carries more weight. From my personal experience, I have created articles for Japanese athletes before (mostly boxers and marathon runners) and finding sources can be quite challenging. Adding to this, this player played a decade ago. Most sources would be a decade or more old. As much as we may want to believe the Internet gives access to anything, finding decade old non-English sources is really hard to do. This guy played in the second highest league in the world and in a large, first world nation's most popular sport. Its one game, but U.S. athletes have been shown to meet it, no reason to not stick with the presumption that a player from Japan would as well. RonSigPi (talk) 22:46, 26 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Accusing me of bias without evidence is a bit troubling - I think playing in one game no matter what sport is no fair grounds for notability. I know it passes the Baseball notability, but that doesn't mean it passes GNG. It was a recently created article I found, for a player who pitched in 1/3rd of an inning all time, so I XfDed it. You gave your opinion but there is no reason to not AGF. ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peador ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 18:50, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per all above. Meets WP:NBASE #2. Ejgreen77 (talk) 00:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep By appearing in an NPB game, we presume him to be notable. We presume there is Japanese-language coverage of him. Even though TridentMan123 (or is it Alexsautographs?) did a terrible job of creating this page, NBASEBALL exists for good reason. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:53, 1 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NBASE, which explicitly states "Although statistics sites may be reliable sources, they are not sufficient by themselves to establish notability". The JP wiki, only has one reference for him a Japanese statistics site. Outside of these, there is a blog post, and a one-line mention. menaechmi (talk) 15:21, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is a difference between establishing notability and presuming notability. WP:NSPORT is just a guideline. Meeting any one of them does not establish notability. But meeting one allows us to presume that the subject is notable and the notability is reasonably likely to be able to be established if editors look hard enough. In view of my comments above, in this case I think we give the presumption its due and keep. We have to make a tough call - no matter what it's going to be really hard to find sources. So we have to make a judgement call. Considering the factors, keep. RonSigPi (talk) 22:55, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's totally fair - and frankly I have concede the article remaining. I still stand with my original arguments, but it is general WP policy for an appearance in a single game to be considered sufficient. Since consensus is against making an exception, I accept defeat. The only issue I took was regarding NPOV - I just want you to know I am not biased against Japan! Cheers ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peador ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 00:00, 3 August 2017 (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.