Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lisa Nakamichi

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 02:31, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lisa Nakamichi[edit]

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

Musician who fails WP:GNG and WP:MUSIC. Only source in the article is not an independent reliable source since she is artistic director of this festival [1]. Searches in English only find this local paper article [2], while searches in Japanese (中道リサ) find no significant independent coverage. Everything else is either concert announcements, which don't count, or promotional material for her festival. Michitaro (talk) 03:49, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What about the awards at the competitions?--Mishae (talk) 03:52, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing in the article has been corroborated with an independent source. If you can find those sources, as well as sufficient independent significant sources, I will withdraw my nomination. Michitaro (talk) 03:55, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well she can't made up an award, could she? Like, wont that be considered slender on her part?--Mishae (talk) 03:59, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, it is not outside the realm of possibility. That is why everything in Wikipedia has to be WP:VERIFIABLE. This is an article in which nothing is verified. And when I search her name both in Japanese and English, nothing significant comes up. You need to do more to show this passes WP:GNG. Michitaro (talk) 04:06, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Michitaro (talk) 04:15, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I wonder what user @Randykitty: will say about that. If nothing is verified doesn't mean that you should nominate it for deletion. Wikipedia have a ton of articles that use external links and not reliable sources and no one cares about those. While, articles that I write, are automatically, without question get deletion nomination!--Mishae (talk) 04:22, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP:OSE. Just because other articles have a problem does not mean this article satisfies WP:GNG. If your articles are getting nominated for deletion, perhaps it would be good to more closely review WP:GNG. Michitaro (talk) 04:29, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So, in your opinion, she made up an award? That's ridiculous!--Mishae (talk) 04:48, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's not a legitimate argument for an AfD discussion. See WP:AADD. Now, another user has added a source to the Cleveland Piano award. Unfortunately, it refers to the wrong person (Yuko Nakamichi, not Lisa Nakamichi). But looking at the Cleveland site, it seems that the Mozart Prize is one of the minor prizes given every year [3]. While there is no record on the site of Lisa Nakamichi winning that prize, even if there was a record, it clearly does not satisfy criterion 9 of WP:MUSIC: "Has won or placed in a major music competition." Notability has not yet been proven. Michitaro (talk) 05:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see the user has noticed the mistake and removed the source. Michitaro (talk) 05:07, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Evidence of notability is just not there. Will reconsider if WP:RS sources demonstrating significant award(s) is presented. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:55, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. In the absence of any reliable third-party sourcing or in-depth coverage, it's hard to see how this person satisfies the basic notability criteria. --DAJF (talk) 06:18, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 16:14, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not finding anything through web searches, nor a qualifying WP:MUSICBIO criterion. — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:21, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment why not delete those? Markku Laakso and Leonid Korchmar, they are much older and have only one external link?--Mishae (talk) 04:31, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Again: WP:OSE. Do also note that WP:NRVE states: "Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate citation. Wikipedia articles are not a final draft, and an article's subject can be notable if such sources exist, even if they have not been named yet." So just because an article only has one external link does not mean it definitely should be deleted. It is only after checking to see if somewhere there are not sufficient independent reliable sources to prove notability should it be nominated. So if you have made such a concerted search regarding those two figures and can find no good sources, feel free to nominate them for deletion. The problem here is that multiple editors have failed to find sufficient reliable sources for Lisa Nakamichi, and that is why it is being considered for deletion. Finding other problem articles will not help this article: you must find real sources to improve it. Michitaro (talk) 05:23, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

O.K. I moved to an external link so that folks here wont think that I promote anything. However, WP:NRVE also states:

If it is likely that significant coverage in independent sources can be found for a topic, deletion due to lack of notability is inappropriate.

Which makes me wonder, if its inappropriate to delete (or PROD) an article solely on the lack of notability (and in this case verifiability).--Mishae (talk) 17:22, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I also proposed deletions of the above mentioned articles. I will see to it, what will happen.--Mishae (talk) 17:42, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence you quote could be written better, but the statement merely underlines that one cannot argue that an article is not notable and should be deleted when there is the possibility of significant coverage. In other words, it is reiterating that significant coverage is the main standard for judging notability. Otherwise, lack of notability is one of the main reasons articles are deleted (see WP:DEL-REASON). Michitaro (talk) 20:44, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So what you are saying that there might not be any future coverage on Lisa Nakamichi, yet, somehow there will be coverage on Markku Laakso and Leonid Korchmar???? Care to explain how? Plus, by removing one of the non-notables doesn't mean that your site will be free from scum articles.--Mishae (talk) 21:21, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I nowhere made a judgement on Laakso and Korchmar. I only reiterated general Wikipedia policy. From your repeated questions, it is clear you have not sufficiently familiarized yourself with Wikipedia notability guidelines. For instance, note WP:ATA#CRYSTAL: Notability cannot be judged based on what might happen, because it is always possible it might not happen. Notability is judged based on what exists now. I recommend that you closely read Wikipedia notability guidelines (WP:GNG, WP:BIO, etc.) before making another comment. Michitaro (talk) 21:58, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You know, tell you what: I admit that I am not familiarized with GNG, because in this case we are talking about music. And to be frank, I just misunderstood your point and I apologize for any misunderstanding. There is no need to tell me over and over to read GNG and point me to other unrelated to this person rules. If you want this article to be deleted, feel free. Making Wikipedia having less articles means that there will be less participants.

I'm still concerned though about your believe that she might made up awards comment. Like, if so, we could also assume that Hajime Sugiyama didn't served in World War II for instance because it cites books with no reference to pages.--Mishae (talk) 03:40, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad you are getting to understand some of the rules about notability. For music, WP:NMUSIC gives the guidelines. There is much discussion on Wikipedia about how editing or deleting articles may discourage new editors who don't know the rules. But the rules have to maintained or the quality of the encyclopedia will suffer. And since you are a veteran editor with far more edits than me, I would assume learning a bit more about how Wikipedia works would be less frustrating than productive. Finally, since I do new page patrolling, I should emphasize that I've seen a lot: hoax pages, blatant self-promotion, faked evidence, etc. Even famous people have been found to embellish their resumes. It happens. So all claims have to be verified. But with over 4,000,000 pages on Wikipedia, we can't check everything immediately. If you can help with that process, that would be appreciated. Michitaro (talk) 05:07, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I have seen self promotional articles myself too. Mine aren't promotional though. Articles that I write even though contain an external link, don't say that he is such and such, it said he is such and such because. Now, can we shake on it, since I am a new page patroller also, although not yet experienced in that field. Quality of encyclopedia wont suffer just because someone is not notable. Quality of encyclopedia suffers when someone not references articles at all, such as here: Sasha Mäkilä. What's this? Personally I don't care if the article will be deleted, what makes me sad is that sometimes I waste a whole day, and only get greeted with deletion template. :(--Mishae (talk) 06:14, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I got a great idea! Lets collaborate together on this: You stationed in Japan, right? Can you be so kind to go to your nearby library and see if they have books related to this particular pianist? Like since she is Japanese-American you should have sources offline about her. By the way, in your opinion am I veteran editor one, two, or higher rank?--Mishae (talk) 06:25, 27 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is getting off the topic, let's take this discussion to our talk pages. Michitaro (talk) 13:55, 27 January 2014 (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.