Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Japanese Society (book)

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. Haukur (talk) 13:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese Society (book)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Has two citations, which are the book itself. Otherwise, has remained unsourced for 13 years. I cannot find any reliable secondary sources to establish notability. — Goszei (talk) 06:25, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. — Goszei (talk) 06:25, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. — Goszei (talk) 06:25, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. — Goszei (talk) 06:25, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Seems nothing groundbreaking here. Hyperbolick (talk) 06:59, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: substantial discussion in reliable sources exists, for example, this article in the Journal of Contemporary Asia; this book by Ross Mouer and Yoshio Sugimoto, published by Routledge (see pp. 60, 281–4); this review in The Journal of Asian Studies; and this review essay in the Bulletin of Concerned Asian Scholars. – Arms & Hearts (talk) 20:01, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, meets WP:NBOOK, a gsearch brings up numerous reviews some of which are listed above. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:00, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

more indications of wikinotability - held by over 1100 libraries (see here), has been the subject of study (eg. see here), from Rethinking Japanese Studies: Eurocentrism and the Asia-Pacific Region - "There are cases whereby the works by the first type (by local authors for the local audience) have been translated into English and become influential amongst the Anglo-Western readership. For example, Chie Nakane's Japanese Society (1973) (2,404 citations)...". Coolabahapple (talk) 14:51, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep as a review of the sources shows WP:POTENTIAL. It's not clear to me how much is in those sources to write an article. My best guess is that it's enough though. Archrogue (talk) 18:37, 26 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,   Kadzi   (talk) 09:54, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep needs improvements + references added --Devokewater @ 10:00, 29 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep sources exist, WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. --Ahecht (TALK
PAGE) 13:49, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as notable enough. --Lockley (talk) 19:56, 30 July 2020 (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.