Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Takegami

: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speedy keep, nomination withdrawn. (NAC) --J.Mundo (talk) 07:55, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

=[[Takegami]]=

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

Article is approaching 3 years old and still no content aside from the fact that it is a OVA anime series, who made it and when. No assertion of notability. The only external information is a link to the official site. Delete because it doesn't meet notability guidelines. Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 08:23, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete mention at the J.C.Staff article. 76.66.198.171 (talk) 05:39, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Delete: article fails to establish notability. JamesBurns (talk) 05:51, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep under corrected English release name Guardian of Darkness with added redirect of Takegami: Guardian of Darkness. has been reviewed by several reliable sources.[http://www.mania.com/reviews/takegami-guardian-darkness_article_73979.html][http://www.themanime.org/viewreview.php?id=441][http://www.ex.org/2.7/23-anime_takegami.html] Being a stub doesn't mean it isn't notable, even if its been a stub awhile. Likely to be covered in some print sources as well...will work on expanding after I get back from shopping. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 19:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

::Update: Done some work on the article and it now has 12 reliable sources, not counting those 3 reviews already noted. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 00:30, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Multiply reviewed = notable, so keep. (Thanks to Collectonian for doing the searches I hadn't gotten to.) —Quasirandom (talk) 19:43, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Aitias // discussion 00:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

  • Keep: Notability established by the sources provided by Collectonian. --J.Mundo (talk) 07:26, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep after collectonian's efforts. ThuranX (talk) 07:28, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
  • Nom changing to Keep article appears to have been fixed, thanks Collectonian! --Kraftlos (Talk | Contrib) 07:41, 11 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.