Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sakura Hime Kaden

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 merge to Arina Tanemura. MBisanz ^talk 03:01, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sakura Hime Kaden[edit]

Unnotable manga series of unknown length that fails WP:BK. Series has only just started serialization this month with only two chapters publisher. First volume released. Obviously no notability whatsoever. Prod was removed with reason that author's other works have articles (not a valid reason to keep per BK). -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 05:03, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. -- -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 05:04, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy: Clearly fails WP:N, WP:BK, and WP:MOS-AM#Notablility. Therefore I can't say "keep". However, the success of the author's previous series (all except the second most recent one meet at least WP:MOS-AM#Notability) lets reasonably assume, that this series will eventually become notable. That's why it doesn't seem right to !vote for outright deletion. -- Goodraise (talk) 06:38, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Given the number of articles you can find about the announcement of this series, one can make an argument for the series notability based on coverage of the anticipation of it. I'm not sure I'm going to make it myself, though. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:30, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps...except all of them are based off the same announcement so really just one source republished :P -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:03, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is the problem of interpretation, yes. OTOH, it could be that all the reports exist indicates that the sources believe it's of note for their readers. —Quasirandom (talk) 17:53, 12 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Don't forget about Japanese sources :) WhisperToMe (talk) 06:56, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If there any, no one has found them yet. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 02:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Have fun here & tell me if it's WP:RS a japanese website

Shueisha is strongly pushing that series : First chapter free for reading, Shueisha. Whatever it's worth their effort is too soon to judge.

I think it should be putted in a fridge until we have enough ammunitions to support that article.--KrebMarkt 12:06, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding mangaspirits.com. I'm not sure if the authors qualify as experts in the field, however it is most definitely a blog, and says so on their "about" page. --Farix (Talk) 15:36, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's too early to tell if this new manga series will become notable. Better to wait until it is covered by third-party reliable sources. No predigest for recreation if the third-party reliable sources do appear. --Farix (Talk)
Merge to Arina Tanemura, the series creator. If it demonstrates enough notability later, it can be broken off into a separate article again. Edward321 (talk) 00:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: notability not established. JamesBurns (talk) 02:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'm with Goodraise here -- it's not a keep, but given the author's status as a hitmaker and amount of notice the series announcement got, it's not a delete either. I think Edward321 has the best solution: merge to Arina Tanemura until such time as it more conclusively demonstrates notability. —Quasirandom (talk) 15:04, 20 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.