Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eiji Maruyama

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. Black Kite (talk) 09:34, 28 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Eiji Maruyama

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

Relevant sources are nil using Google search. Subject's career consists of only small time villains in Tokusatsu, and bit parts in anime voice roles. No news coverage found, either. I do not believe the subject is notable enough to say the least. Sk8erPrince (talk) 06:37, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. --SephyTheThird (talk) 08:17, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Other than Wiseman, there's not much to say about his anime roles. However, Tokusatsu wikiproject might find this actor notable. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 09:43, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

He voices a bunch of characters in the tokusatsus. This leads me to believe he is called upon as a utility role in the series, doing villains of the week, so that's a significant role. This should be reviewed against the other stars. How many utility roles are there in the series. If he's among 20 "additional voices" then it's not that important, but if it's among 2-3 people who always appear, then his significance increases. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:31, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any honorable mentions regarding the subject? If not, the subject is not that notable. --Sk8erPrince (talk) 09:46, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by honorable mentions? AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 10:00, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Has the subject won any awards/prizes for his work? Is there any news coverage regarding the subject? I won't see the subject as notable unless I see them. --Sk8erPrince (talk) 10:03, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:10, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 17:30, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:23, 6 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sarahj2107 (talk) 10:16, 18 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It seems that reliable sources are close to nonexistent, as stated in the nom. Perhaps fails GNG too, although I'm not really sure on that one. However, such severe source issues by itself are grounds for deletion. MPD (Talk to me!) 12:27, 18 October 2016 (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.