Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haruka Ishida

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. Yamamoto Ichiro (talk) 19:36, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Haruka Ishida[edit]

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

No indication of a substantial career outside the band, as outlined under WP:MUSIC. Large amount of the information duplicates what is already available through the band page or list of members. Karst (talk) 19:12, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is simply not true that "Large amount of the information duplicates what is already available through the band page or list of members". It is really hard to AGF this nomination. (I will return with some sources to prove WP:GNG.) --Moscow Connection (talk) 19:47, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I wanted to show you some articles about her, but there are too many in Google News. She has voiced anime characters, sung theme songs for anime series, was an "ambassador" for a festival, acted in musicals, co-hosted at least one variety show on TV, etc. I will just expand the article a bit. (Not right now, I will do it in the next few days.)
And don't forget that she has been a member of two notable groups, AKB48 and No Name (the latter had two very high charting singles: "Kibō ni Tsuite" and "Kono Namida o Kimi ni Sasagu"), so she passes WP:MUSICBIO #6. --Moscow Connection (talk) 20:09, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Except that No Name is a subunit from AKB48, so it isn't independently notable. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 22:18, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is independently notable cause it is a separate group. It charted independently. (And each member in it represents herself, not her main group.) By the way, it isn't a subgroup of AKB48. The group included several members of AKB48, SKE48 and NMB48. --Moscow Connection (talk) 22:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It should perhaps be noted that Moscow Connection is the creator of the article. Just to clarify, I have used this AfD as a guideline, where @Drmies: outlined the bandmember pages criteria as "people [who] have done anything that makes them notable according to the GNG outside of their group membership". When that has been established I'll happily withdraw the AfD. Karst (talk) 14:34, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Karst--I suppose I was merely citing WP:NBAND: "Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases." Which, by the way, means not that they have to have had a solo release, or that a solo release in itself is grounds for notability: any solo release obviously needs to have generated something along the lines of secondary sourcing from reliable sources. Drmies (talk) 14:52, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your clarification. That is exactly what we are trying to establish here. Karst (talk) 14:56, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Moscow, "each member in it represents herself, not her main group"--I can't really parse that, and I don't think it means very much. Drmies (talk) 16:39, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Moscow Connection (talk) 20:57, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Moscow Connection (talk) 20:57, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It is still a spinoff of AKB48 and 48-group members and managed under the 48-group umbrella. It's different from a solo career or a crossover endeavor with other musicians in other groups. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:20, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This person is clearly notable. Outside of her musical carrer, she has voiced anime characters, and appeared in musicals. Ethanlu121 (talk) 23:58, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Except that the anime characters are related to AKB48, so not independently notable. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:20, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep She used to host several radio programs like [1][2][3], and she has musical career outside AKB48 [4][5][6][7]. Cutebassa (talk) 15:13, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The radio programs are AKB48 related. Same with the anime. The Vocaloid may be okay, but does she have a main role in the title? The radio one where she promotes the phone app is a maybe, but is the game notable in itself and does she star in it? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:20, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good points. Going back to the Apink example, there it was established that the member names all redirected to small bio's on the main page. The exception was Jung Eun-ji who branched out into acting - and has a career entirely outside of the band. Hope this helps.Karst (talk) 15:01, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What this person has done does not strike me as notable at all per GNG. A few anime roles (with our without the band) does not notability make, and neither does hosting a radio program or doing a voice part. The TV appearances all seem like bit parts, and there is no reliable secondary sourcing to prove that any of these things were worth noticing--and please y'all, don't cite things like this (from "4gamer.net") to prove notability: that's not sourcing worthy of an encyclopedia. Drmies (talk) 15:20, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with Drmies, there is trouble when there is no secondary sourcing present. Her anime roles also appear to fail WP:ENT. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 16:57, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am changing my opinion to Keep based on developments. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:59, 9 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What developments? The only change to the article since the AfD has been a newsitem where she announced her graduation and ambition 'to pursue her dream as a voice actress'. Karst (talk) 14:52, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I like to express some thoughts: i) It would be easier for everyone if the contested articles about lesser known members of AKB48 would actually contain more than the little information which is actually present in these articles. Especially when the available content only deals with things directly related to her status as a AKB48 member, and could be derived from the general articles as well. Hence, i dont know if this person needs her own article, because she really belongs to the members of the group which are only known to the fandom. And the article in its current form does not help it. ii) In general, I dont think treating members of japanese idol groups as real musicians (and thus, under the scope of the Music guidelines) would bring us far. Members of these bands are rarely musicians (or even artists), and it is quite the misunderstanding that AKB48 is a musical band in a traditional way. AKB48 releases are rarely bought because of their musical content. They are entertainers in the broadest sense, and one should think of AKB48 as a agency for female entertainers/tarentos, who are participiating in a never-ending "reality tv with music." iii) With this in mind, IMHO the sentence "everything X does, depends on her role as member of Y" is not tackling the issue. With this argument, Rino Sashihara doesnt deserve an article, while she is certainly a very big name in japanese entertainment right now - but everything she does is directly related to her status as a member of these groups. I saw that the article Sayaka Yamamoto was contested for the same reasons as well, which is weird, given that she is one of the most talked-about idols in Japan right now. So, the real question here is if Wikipedia can or should or wants to adapt to special properties of japanese entertainment industry, because merely applying rules which were created for real musical acts does not do the trick. iv) If everything fails, almost all adult members of these groups can count as Gravure idol, for which even a own category exists. Take this with a grain of humour :>. Rka001 (talk) 00:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

There shouldn't be an exception for Japanese idols as there are plenty of music group members who are in the same situation where they are mainly associated with the group and perform vocals. Liam Payne and Louis Tomlinson have separate articles where even though they are members of One Direction they have notable independent activity from the band such as solo career, football and golf. But yes, those secondary major roles help made the person notable and distinguish them from "I'm with the band" inherited notability. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 02:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Being 'a big name in Japanese entertainment' or 'most talked-about idols' needs to be supported by reliable secondary sources. AKB48 is listed as a musical group. I refer back to the aPink example. The list of AKB48 members article (and the groups associated with them) could include the material listed in these articles and thus avoiding the issues highlighted in this AfD. The comparison with One Direction is a complicated one as the members of that group already had a developing career prior to joining. Karst (talk) 11:32, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input. This is not article-related work, but rather an exchange of thoughts. Therefore, i was using the cases of Sashihara Rino and Yamamoto Sayaka to illustrate the difficulties when the notability of a japanese idol is evaluated by wikipedia guidelines. Both are extremely popular in Japan - i dont think this needs to referenced here in this informal context - but their individual popularity cannot be decomposed from their status as members of a notable group. Still, it would be extremely counterproductive to remove their articles. Apink doesnt really fit here in my opinion. Apink is foremost a musical act, but AKB48 is a multimedia enterprise, for which music is a important, but by far not the only vehicle. Also, in contrast, the entire group has several hundred current and former members - which makes the use of short bios within main articles a mess - , of which i daresay that 20-30 would easily pass notability criteria. The same argument could be had with the male counterpart, Johnny's Entertainment, by the way. One direction is also not well comparable to AKB48. Again, AKB48 does not fit the definition of a musical act, even if its listed as musical group here. It doesnt make too much sense, to apply criteria for musical groups. Rka001 (talk) 13:13, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point about the group being entertainment, however, that argument can be made about every musical group/pop band. The so-called multimedia aspects all relate back to the group, carry the name and are obviously used to promote the brand (and listed as such on the main page). If the category is under discussion then that needs to be addressed on the main Talk page. I use the Apink example because of the AfD discussion about notability of individual members and the consensus that was reached there after reviewing the sources. The issue the same here. Moreover, a noted administrator, Drmies, provided clarification there that also applies here. There is a List of AKB48 members and a List of former members of AKB48 but I see your point in those pages getting overly long when the bios are merged. They currently list the various team pages with members mentioned in tables. Perhaps the solution here is to create individual pages for the teams and then move some of the content of individual pages to the team pages. So Yui Yokoyama would go into the AKB48 (Team A) page with a 'see also' link to the Not Yet (band) page. That way the content is still associated with the group, the various releases associated with it and the notability issue would not arise. Karst (talk) 14:19, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Um, definitely not split by Team (A,K,B, etc.). The individual teams don't carry enough notability. But I agree about discussing whether to split members can go on the members talk page. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 14:27, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 14:57, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:26, 24 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to AKB48 at best since this is not seriously needed for deletion but it is still questionably solid as its own, likely best until there's better independent notability. SwisterTwister talk 04:54, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – The article must give attention to her non-48 roles such as Dream Creator where she was a semi-regular guest in 2011 and then joined as a MC (co-host) of the variety show starting mid-2012. [8] Note, in that profile, she is listed as involved in AKB48 but not a major star in the group (Under Girls and other B-sides), but is nonetheless independent from the 48 work. The Nobunaga the Fool role is a supporting lead, which gives her at least two major roles in anime. But if the only stuff available is her involvement in 48 then it needs to be redirected right away. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:05, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@AngusWOOF: It appears to be. I would support a redirect and inclusion of some of the material as outlined above. Karst (talk) 14:49, 13 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 22:54, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, it is difficult to analyze the sourcing because it is primarily in Japanese, but it seems to me there is enough to pass muster. Also its worth noting that she has an article in six other language versions of Wikipedia, presumably the Japanese and Korean Wikipedians would know best. Antrocent (♫♬) 19:09, 6 April 2016 (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.