Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Visa policy of Japan

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. Per ANI can we have a single discussion somewhere? Spartaz ^Humbug! 04:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Visa policy of Japan[edit]

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

Delete Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information and this topic is not encyclopedic. Basket of Puppies 13:08, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep: as per the other AfDs keeps, proposed deletions and AfD-proposing-user talk pages. There are too much analogous visa-policy-related-AfDs currently and I think if there is a need for a new discussion (as there were such before) it should be on a single page. Alinor (talk) 13:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: WP:INDISCRIMINATE doesn't really apply here, as the topic at hand is quite notable. Currently, the article lacks information; it barely has any prose, it's just a just of countries, etc. I think WP:SOFIXIT applies here - it would be much better to fix the Ryugyong Hotel rather than to knock it down because it has faults. Rather than deleting the article, time would be better spent expanding it. -- 李博杰 | —Talk contribs email 13:43, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep what appears to be another nomination that didn't properly go through WP:BEFORE. [1] plenty of independent material on the subject including things like why certain changes were made, who pressured the government to look into visa changes, social concerns with visa changes, etc.--Crossmr (talk) 15:11, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 17:22, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep for reasons described in previous visa AFD's. scope_creep (talk) 18:50, 26 August 2010 (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.