Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shibata Takumi (fund manager)

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 speedy keep‎. Nomination withdrawn. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:59, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Shibata Takumi (fund manager)[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)

Reviewed during NPP. No evidence of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. Basic business person resume/CV. Of the 4 references, 3 are brief appointment announcements and one is a brief database type description. North8000 (talk) 15:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Finance, and Japan. Skynxnex (talk) 16:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Obvious Keep I wonder if North8000 did a WP:BEFORE search including sources in Japanese. We're talking about the former CEO of a company with $250 billion under management. [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] (and yes, I realize some of these are short but keep in mind Japanese is a much more concise language. These results are just from the first couple of pages of results in a quick Google search btw. DCsansei (talk) 10:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How about picking/pointing out 2 that cover him in depth. North8000 (talk) 12:18, 29 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:51, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep/withdraw The creator has increased it from 4 references up to 27 references. They've also asked me to take a look at those/the article as they are away on vacation/holidays. (IMO this mostly means analyzing all of the new references and finding the GNG-best ones per my request above)....happy to help someone enjoy their vacation/holidays and I did. Most of the best looking ones are behind paywalls, but as a minimum there are many near-GNG references by top tier sources. They have also expanded the article substantially with enclyclopedic content, also indicative of the addition of in-depth references. While I can't vouch for the most rigorous-interpretation GNG compliance, I have decided to switch to "keep/withdraw". Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 11:53, 2 May 2024 (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.