Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hanky Panky (manga)

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. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 01:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hanky Panky (manga)[edit]

No reliable third-party sources could be found to establish notability. Also fails WP:BK. I believe the only reason the article was created was because it was licensed for translation into English, which is not a notability criteria. It is suspected that a representative of the publishing company originally created the article. Farix (Talk) 23:40, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, fails WP:BK, with no significant coverage in reliable third party sources beyond one or two publication announcements. Has not been reviewed by any reliable source either, though it was released in November. This is one of many bad stub creations of confirmed Aurora socks using the site for self-promotion (5 or 6 blocked so far), including their having copy/pasted their promo materials into the articles. No prejudice against recreation if it ever actually does receive any reviews and notability. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. -- -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 23:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There may be WP:RS for this in Japanese, but I can't search in that language, and I found nuttin' in English aside from press releases. No sign it meets any other criteria of WP:BK. —Quasirandom (talk) 02:01, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Searching for sources in your own language is a good idea, but I think commissioning opinions from people who can read Japanese (like those in the Japan wikiproject) should be done to confirm beyond a doubt that this should be deleted. - Mgm|^(talk) 11:03, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's a fair number of Japanese readers involved in Anime and Manga WikiProject, which is under the Japan WikiProject's aegis. A good number of them even monitor this deletion sort. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:33, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To add, all of the Aurora Publishing related articles have been under scrutiny for a while after it came to light that representatives of the publishing company were using Wikipedia as an advertising platform. WikiProject Anime and manga reviewed each of the articles before sending the problems ones to AfD. --Farix (Talk) 16:54, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 04:59, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Agree with nominator. Doctorfluffy (robe and wizard hat) 00:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment http://www.icv2.com/articles/news/13916.html list the sales figure of Hanky Panky during Novermber of 2008. It is just under Batman for that month. I see other notable comics and manga listed not that much higher up. Odd. I always thought comics sold better than that. Normally I'd think only four hundred copies sold did not make it notable, but then I see how few copies of Batman, various X-men series, and whatnot sell, and compared to them, it isn't that bad at all. Am I misreading something here? Dream Focus (talk) 14:33, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Other then the fact that sales figures and rankings have nothing to do with notability and that the mention in that ICv2 article is trivial in accordance with WP:NOTE. --Farix (Talk) 14:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above. All have been written about it. I may add that WP:Anime doesn't have as a purpose to the mirror of every manga publisher catalog nor to be fanboys or fangirls wikia replica. Save WP some bandwidth & money. --KrebMarkt 20:33, 19 January 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.