Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cousin White Paper: Aching Mature Lewdness

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 no consensus. I do not see a consensus on the reference to the award. The fact that it is in Japanese does not help. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:40, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cousin White Paper: Aching Mature Lewdness

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

The claim to notability for this film is that it "won" eight place in the japanese porn awards show "Pink Grand Prix." That's called coming in eighth, not "winning." There does not appear to be any substantial coverage inependent of the subject (since the pink grand prix is an appendix of the porn-marketting machine in japan). The article is largely a vehicle to have pretty girls titties displayed. Fails GNG, FILM, etc... Bali ultimate (talk) 13:48, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, now I'm getting pissed off... Delete and ~~Ban Creator~~ Strongly Warn Creator for spamming. Carrite (talk) 15:03, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Having reviewed the contributions history of the creator, this is not a new spammer. There does, however, need to be a chainsaw taken to many, many other similar articles, it would seem. Carrite (talk) 15:43, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

But Carrite, when another very recent AfD has clear evidence of spamming and nobody else praises the result (I'm the closest, with a very reluctant, eye-rolling "keep"), you write "Keep - Well-done article about an accomplished artist". Now, where was it that I should deploy my chainsaw? -- Hoary (talk) 14:18, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:46, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm concerned that this article cites mainly the web site P*G Website -- it is not obvious to me that this is a reliable source adequate to verify content or establish notability. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 21:25, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:NOTFILM, and has no coverage shown in reliable independent sources. The Pink Grand Prix is a readers' poll conducted by "PG" (perhaps "P*G") magazine, a publication of no established notability. According to this news article [1], cited as a reliable source in the article on the award itself, "PG" is a "fanzine," or fan magazine. Reader polls, whether for print or online publications, generally aren't seen as establishing notability unless the publication is clearly notable (if then), and when they are, only the first place finisher is generally seen as having its own notability established by the poll. The film's article is sourced only to a comprehensive listing of produced films, which establishes only existence but not notability, and to the fanzine's own website, which lacks the independence required to establish notability. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 22:06, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Let's tone down the invective and allegations a bit and look at the facts instead. The film in question is an example of Japanese softcore pink film. This type of film has played an important part in Japanese film history and has been a factor in Japanese culture and politics. The reference [2] that Hullabaloo Wolfowitz cites above is an article by pink film authority Jasper Sharp and gives a good overview of the role that pink film has played in Japanese culture and its growing popularity internationally. Read the article to get a better understanding of where this particular Wikipedia article and others of its kind come from. Sharp has also written a serious study of pink film Behind the Pink Curtain, 2008, (ISBN 978 1 903254 54 7) and although in the article mentioned above, Sharp does in passing call PG a "fanzine", he is more explicit in his book describing it as a (page 379): "Specialist Japanese magazine on pink films, edited by Yoshiyuki Hayashida, established in July 1994." And about the magazine's PG website, which has been brought into question, he has this to say (page 380): "The website of the best magazine on the subject. An invaluable, comprehensive and up-to-date resource on pink movies edited by Yoshiyuki Hayashida." Thus, we have a reliable and authoritative source vouching for both PG magazine and the PG website. As for the Pink Grand Prix, Miho Toda in a series of articles [3] [4] [5] for a reliable source, calls them the Pink Film "Academy Awards" (アカデミー賞). As far as the film not being a first prize winner, if the awarding authorities from "the best magazine on the subject" choose to give awards to more than one candidate, we cannot, as Wikipedia editors, arbitrarily impose rules that only certain awards are "good enough". That would involve cultural bias, POV and OR to make such decisions. In summary, this is a film which has won a significant award given by a prominent magazine and is described in a reliable source. I know of no connection between PG magazine and the [sic] "porn-marketting machine in japan"; if there is one, a source would be welcomed. Incidentally, pink film has always been produced and distributed by the major film studios in Japan. Cherryblossom1982 (talk) 18:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a non-notable title with lots of puff based on a single non-reliable reference source. "8th place" in a reader poll really is insignificant. And English title appears to have been made up by the author to boot. --DAJF (talk) 00:21, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep The Pink film is a hugely significant part of Japanese cinema, and has been for nearly 50 years. It is, basically, all Japanese independent cinema. To equate it with US/western "porn" is culturally biased and ignorant, and nominating this article based on that bias is tantamount to attempting to censor coverage of Japanese independent cinema. Read the Pink film article for details. Many significant figures in Japanese cinema have worked in this genre. Just one example: Yōjirō Takita, the winner of last year's U.S. Academy Award for Best Foreign Language film started in this genre, made a hugely significant contribution to the genre, and this work is a significant portion of his work. The Pink Grand Prix is currently the main award in the genre. Anglo pink film scholar Jasper Sharp, and mainstream Japanese sources have noted this in several writings cited in the article. All films awarded at this ceremony are notable simply due to this one award. To claim they are not is to make a laughing-stock Wikipedia's claims of neutrality and encyclopedic coverage. Also, this film was directed by Tetsuya Takehora, one of the most significant new directors in the genre, and produced by OP Eiga. Read the article on that studio for some background. Are we to censor this because of the belligerent ignorance of a few Anglo prudes? I will add more here, but the fact that Bali ultimate-- a proud bigot-- has got votes in his corner-- besides the obvious Hullaballoo-- is truly disgusting. I strongly suggest that anyone who purports to be interested in creating an encyclopedia which includes Japanese cinema as a subject area, review their !votes. Because I can tell you for your, your Delete vote is WRONG here. This is nothing less than an effort to censor an entire genre of Japanese cinema based on the cultural and moral bias of a few Wikipedia editors. Dekkappai (talk) 03:21, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per comprehensive rationale of Cherryblossom1982, and strongly warn Carrite about personal attacks-comment on the article, not the editor.--Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 04:30, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per reasoned comments above, as notability in Japan is notable enough for en.Wikipedia. Western (or personal) POV should never be used to negatively color discussion of Eastern film, Eastern art, or Eastern culture, as cultural standards greatly vary. Calling something from another country "obscure" is a bit much, as WP:UNKNOWNHERE is not a criteria for deletion. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:59, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Pink film is notable, many specific pink films are notable, I accept the award as apparently notable, and I appreciate that there are articles on them. I'd like to see more thorough coverage of pornography on Wikipedia. This specific film is not WP-notable, however. The film is lacking the sort of significant coverage from Reliable sources and consequent verifiability one would want for an encyclopedia article. Instead of prose following the topics in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (film) there are bare statements of fact as to having gotten the award, the cast, crew, and a brief plot outline, essentially WP:PLOTONLY apart from a short lede. If that's all that can be written, then that's a problem. Merely winning an award is not a guarantee a film is notable by WP's standards Wikipedia:Notability (films), only a general indicator it might be if there are RS for things other than the mere fact of winning the award. It's the existence of RS treating the film as the subject at length that is the measure of WP-notability. This film could be better treated in a list of films that won the award, if that. Шизомби (Sz) (talk) 18:16, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I am not going to repeat my arguments another time just because somebody who gets regulary his own sections on ANI started a mass deletion campaign[6] simply based on a massive lack of WP:NPOV as already shown. Testales (talk) 13:24, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTFILM. The Pink Grand Prix is not a "major award", and coming eighth place is not an award win anyway. Epbr123 (talk) 22:15, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As others have pointed out, NFILMS is used to show when it is expected that coverage will exist. In this case there is doubt whether NFILMS applies (8th place being called an award win?). As such, we should look in more depth to see whether there is significant coverage in independent reliable sources. These sources do not seem to be available so the article should be deleted. Quantpole (talk) 08:16, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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

'Is it 8th out of 8? Or 8th or of 1000? I cannot read Japanese. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:14, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep according to my detailed argument above for "Older Officer Lady." This seems to be position 8 in the top 10, out of about 100-150 a year, It would intrinsically seem reasonable to me that the 10 best films in a major genre like these would be suitable of coverage in an encyclopedia, not just the best one of the year. Not reading Japanese, I assume the statement is correct that the sources do show this is the major award in the subject DGG ( talk ) 22:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep although I don't think it's nearly as clear-cut as has been suggested. I'm concerned about the paucity of sources and the notability of the awards. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 18:31, 6 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't think it's been mentioned that besides being named among the Top Ten, the film also has a performance which won a Best New Actress award: Kaho Kasumi. Dekkappai (talk) 06:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Cousin White Paper: Aching Mature Lewdness" is surely as splendid a movie title as Happiness is a red before exploding is a book title. True, the latter is plainly printed in crimson on white whereas the former has merely been inferred from the Japanese (perhaps with the aid of dictionary and beer) but the wording can be further improved. ¶ Now, what's the nomination again? The article is largely a vehicle to have pretty girls titties displayed. But I think that at least one of the two is supposed to be "mature", so this should be "pretty women's titties". ¶ Pretty Woman! Now that (with simulated blowjob) is real schlock; surely Cousin White Paper: Aching Mature Lewdness can't be worse. (For starters, viewers won't be subjected to Roy Orbison.) One way in which this article is certainly better than that one is its refreshingly concise synopsis; compare its "Sakura is a young woman who begins exploring her sexuality while preparing for university life" with "[blah blah blah] His leaping from the white limousine, and then climbing the outside ladder and steps, is a visual urban metaphor for the knight on white horse rescuing the "princess" from the tower, a childhood fantasy she'd told him about. The film ends as the two of them kiss on the fire escape." Ack! ¶ Minor but adequate notability adequately sourced: an aching keep, and let it either mature or (since it's harmless) stay as it is. -- Hoary (talk) 14:18, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Synopses are another matter... I've always preferred a one- or two-sentence general idea of the setting and story. The experts over at Film Project, however, have determined the exact amount of words necessary for a proper synopsis-- and it's a lot. I've done a full one over at Bitter Sweet, but I don't like doing that that. But again, it's what the experts have deemed correct... On the other hand, since the experts over at Porn project have deemed the winning of a notable award to be proof of notability when covering their own area, but not when it's about Japanese subjects they've never heard of, resulting in hundreds of sub-stubs on good, red-blooded Americans, while much more significant Japanese subjects come under attack, one begins to wonder about the, ah, expertise, shall we say?, of these experts... Dekkappai (talk) 16:13, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Further evidence of the authority of Hayashida Yoshiyuki-- editor and publisher of P*G, and host of the Pink Grand Prix-- in the area of Pink film. He is the co-author of the books:
Generation sex : Japanese "pink" movie posters

女優林由美香 / Joyū Hayashi Yumika on the life of Pink film (and AV) actress Yumika Hayashi Dekkappai (talk) 18:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- More Also, along with Pink luminaries such as Masao Adachi, Yutaka Ikejima ("Mr. Pink", the director of a couple of the films targeted), Kiyoshi Kurosawa, Mitsuru Meike, Banmei Takahashi, Kôji Wakamatsu, Yumi Yoshiyuki (writer/director/actress of one of these targeted films), and Mamoru Watanabe, Yoshiyuki Hayashida is given second billing in the documentary on the Pink film genre: Pinku ribon (2004). Dekkappai (talk) 19:22, 7 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.