Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eternal Blaze

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. Rlendog (talk) 19:22, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Eternal Blaze

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

No indication single has received received significant coverage in reliable independent sources; the sole reference cited is a link to a list. Single did chart in Japan, but per WP:MUSIC, "a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article." Single is already covered on the artist page for Nana Mizuki. Tagged for notability since November 2007. Propose: Delete. --DGaw (talk) 00:54, 14 February 2012 (UTC) --DGaw (talk) 00:54, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Peaking at #2 in Japan leads me to think the song is, as WP:NSONGS suggests, "probably notable". This source, which according to Wikipedia:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources#Situational may be considered reliable, notes that "Mizuki's 2005 'Eternal Blaze' CD single for the Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha A's opening theme song was the first single by a voice actress to reach #2 on the weekly chart." I'm curious if siginificant coverage exists in non-English sources. Gongshow ^Talk 06:09, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is true, but WP:NSONGS also says, "Notability aside, a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album. The song is already mention on the artist page. Perhaps a redirect? --DGaw (talk) 17:15, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes you're right, and I did consider that part of the guideline in my above comment, which is why I didn't just write "Keep: it charted." My thought was that such a high placement on a notable chart makes it reasonable to expect significant coverage to exist in Japanese sources, in particular. User:Michitaro provided a link below, so that's a good start. If nothing of substance turns up, then I agree a redirect would be the best option. Gongshow ^Talk 18:02, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. One can argue that the most notable thing about Nana Mizuki is that she is the first seiyu to have major chart success. This song could be called significant because it was the first of her hit songs. Here is a Japanese article from Oricon (the major music business news and ranking company) that talks about precisely that. Michitaro (talk) 13:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oricon is not the only RS to notice that, although it looks like people are even more impressed that another song reached #1 - eg. http://kotaku.com/5452503/mgs-peace-walker-voice-actress-tops-the-japanese-single-charts or http://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2010-01-18/nana-mizuki-is-1st-seiyu-with-no.1-single-in-weekly-charts-updated

Links found in my CSE, as usual. --Gwern (contribs) 22:06 14 February 2012 (GMT)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. --Calathan (talk) 21:51, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article is about a recording, not just a song, and per WP:NALBUMS it needs notability. It's notability is now reflected in the article and referenced, so it should be kept. --Nerefis (talk) 01:12, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 02:12, 22 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The crucial issue seems to be whether there is "enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article". So far we have details such as 1) this peaked at number 2 on the national chart; 2) it charted for 15 weeks; 3) it was certified gold by the record industry (for music downloads); 4) it was the breakthrough song for Nana Mizuki; 5) it was the first time a seiyu hit number 2; 6) it was the theme song for an anime series. There may be more, but without knowing the exact yardstick for "enough verifiable material," I personally think there is enough for a decent article. Deleting it seems extreme. Merging it with Nana Mizuki seems unreasonable, because adding all this--facts which deserve mentioning--would only make a quite large article larger and more unwieldy. Michitaro (talk) 02:21, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. After further consideration, I'm inclined to agree with User:Michitaro's reasoning. Gongshow ^Talk 05:15, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Gongshow and Michitaro. Cavarrone (talk) 10:07, 26 February 2012 (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.