Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tōru Uchimizu

: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. MBisanz talk 03:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

=[[Tōru Uchimizu]]=

:{{la|Tōru Uchimizu}} ([{{fullurl:Tōru Uchimizu|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tōru Uchimizu}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Unnotable manga author who fails WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE. He is not "regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by his peers or successors" and he is not know for "originating a significant new concept, theory or technique". He has not "created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" having written only 3 series which are all, unlicensed for foreign release, and only one of which is even listed in Anime News Network's anime/manga encyclopedia. His work has not been noted in any exhibition, museum, nor "won significant critical attention." He has no significant coverage in reliable, third-party sources. Declined speedy. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:34, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete - three massive failures, all lasting less than a couple of dozen issues. The only interesting thing about him is how someone so spectacularly talentless has been given so many chances. Doceirias (talk) 19:49, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

:* You say that as if Asklepios (manga) has been cancelled. Has it? —Quasirandom (talk) 19:51, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

::* It will be, in the next couple of weeks; been dead last in the chapter listings for a couple of months now. Doceirias (talk) 20:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

:::* Ah -- hadn't seen that. —Quasirandom (talk) 21:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Comment. According to the ja.wiki article, he won some sort of newcomer's award for his debut short story. Looking around for more ... —Quasirandom (talk) 19:49, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

::One award alone wouldn't be enough for Creative though...I suspect that's one of the Shueisha's annual things to find new artists (I forget the exact name) which got him the contract to work there. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 20:03, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

:::Those awards are also handed out like candy several times a year, and most of the artists who receive them are never heard from again. Doceirias (talk) 20:22, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

:::: It does look like it's one of those, yeah -- the sort to be mentioned in the potted career of a notable mangaka, but does not demonstrate notability on its own. —Quasirandom (talk) 21:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep You can't have such an influential and popular magazine(just look at how many mega hit series they've published there), publish one series of yours after another, unless they were notable. Dream Focus (talk) 20:57, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

:Yeah, you can. Again you are attempting to use the "well, he's in WSJ" argument, which is invalid. The notability of the magazine does not mean everything that appears in it is also notable, nor that every author that fills its many pages is notable either. Shuisha regularly publishes a mix of works from established notable authors, and not so notable ones, including the winners of their random contests because it is part of their contracts with those people. That he has written three series and not a single one has received any significant coverage (or really, any coverage at all) shows they are not notable. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 21:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

:* Claiming that being published in WSJ means one's notable is equivalent to saying that being published by, say, Random House makes one notable -- it's not the publisher that matters, it's whether the series or book survives and doesn't go out of print in a couple months (as far too many novels do). —Quasirandom (talk) 21:40, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

: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.