Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Umemaro 3D

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. — Cirt (talk) 15:35, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Umemaro 3D[edit]

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

Fails WP:BIO and WP:NOTE. This is a self-published "game" creator/animator. However, none of the games/videos are notable. Sources are all by the subject himself or a download/retail site that may be a WP:COPYLINK violation. —Farix (t | c) 15:12, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. — I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 16:34, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 16:35, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment While not notable in America, he's quite well known in Japan. Further, a subject like Monty Oum is similar (though he did free work while Umemaro built a business from his work) but has a page none the less. Alucardbarnivous (talk) 20:14, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If its quite well known in Japan, can you do a Google news archive search in that language, and find some coverage? Or search for magazine articles about it? Dream Focus 09:03, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Nothing at all in GNews for 梅麻呂 without the 3D 梅麻呂 without the 3D gets plenty of hits, but from forums and torrent sites and so on. First one is the person's/product's own website. Is not having your own domain name for your product prima facie evidence of non-notabilty? Not my area, so no !vote from me either way. --Shirt58 (talk) 09:44, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Found a ranking for Lewd Consultation Room: http://ha8.seikyou.ne.jp/home/omega/doujin/dos_rank2007.html Alucardbarnivous (talk) 09:49, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

同 dō literally "same", 人 jin, literally "person", ソフト sofuto, "software". 同人ソフト means "self-published software" - see Dōjin soft. The listing is on some individual's personal website. I don't see how assists this article's retention. --Shirt58 (talk) 14:23, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete - I didn't see any notable sources on Google and Yahoo aside from pornography sites featuring videos. SwisterTwister talk 21:54, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Hi, SwisterTwister. At least as it's worded here, the justification for your deletion recommendation seems nonexistent. You say that you saw no "notable sources" "aside from" certain sites. In other words, you did see "notable sources", but you for some reason discounted those "notable sources" (because they're "pornography sites"?). Perhaps you meant something more along the lines of "I didn't see any notable sources on Google and Yahoo; all I saw was pornography sites featuring videos"—? But surely certain pornography sites can be used to establish the notability of certain pornography (or things related to pornography)—just as some sports websites help establish the notability of some sports stuff, right? So the question is (1) what porn sites were mentioning this topic and (2) whether they were giving it some focus or simply making passing references; what did you find? Those answers are the type that help us ascertain (non)notability. (By the way: not that I advocate an encyclopedia's citing itself; but this topic also appears in "List of Japanese erotic computer games".)

As to Farix's description of the cited sources: a quick investigation of the sources (a website "by the subject himself" and "a download/retail site that may be a WP:COPYLINK violation") reveals

(1) that the first sources are at a website by the creator of the subject itself (in that the Wikipedia article, though nominally about the creator, obviously has its focus actually on the creator's works) and

(2) that the latter sources

(A), being linked to from the creator's own website, are unlikely to be WP:COPYLINK violations at Wikipedia and

(B) are some testament to the actual topic's popularity (∴ notability?) (e.g., the first game linked from the Wikipedia article has been sold there at least 335 times for presumably a total of at least ¥527,625—and, counting all the titles linked from the Wikipedia article, we find at least 5,825 instances of people paying for these artworks (at an average price of ¥2,307 for each instance, a total of more than thirteen million yen). (I believe my quick math is right.)

— President Lethe (talk) 18:08, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that there wasn't anything else to make the video notable, in other words....No other sources. SwisterTwister talk 22:47, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 02:04, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:08, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 02:09, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The ANN link is good but weak since it's a DLSite press release; otherwise, there's nothing showing him to be notable. I cleaned up the CSE results looking for something besides ANN, but didn't really find anything - some of the Japanese hits might be relevant, but I don't know Japanese. --Gwern (contribs) 17:31 18 August 2011 (GMT)

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.