Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giichi Okumura

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. -- RG ² 02:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Giichi Okumura

Does not pass WP:BIO. The only English source for his existence is a post on the World's Oldest People forum (see Oldest people for the link) and of the few Ghits, most, if not all, are mirrors and none contain any substantial coverage of or information on the subject of the article. Thus it has little potential for expansion and contains no information aside from what is present in List of living supercentenarians and Oldest people. My basic problem with this article is that there is little, if any, information out there that could be added to this article aside from what is already present at the list of living supercentenarians and oldest people. Cheers, CP 17:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page for the same reason:

Comment These articles are no less informative than Augusto Moreira de Oliveira's is or Sukesaburo Nakanishi's was. Also for Okumura, he is about to turn 111, which is notable, since when Emiliano Mercado died, only Tomoji Tanabe was that age. Captain celery 19:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)Captain celery[reply]

Comment de Oliveira has the potential for expansion. You're right about Nakanishi though, so I've added him to the list as well, as he does not meet the criteria either. Cheers, CP 19:23, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. —Fg2 01:49, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Nakanishi was ranked higher (2nd-oldest in the world instead of 7th or lower) and there was an independent article in Japanese. Thus I favor keeping Nakanishi but not the other two.Ryoung122 08:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all, notability seems questionable. Stifle (talk) 17:54, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's sort of sad that, at the time of Nakanishi's death, there were no media coverage other than a short obit in Japanese. He should stay, however, but the others should go based on the above sentence. If new information on either should emerge the articles should be recreated. ''[[User:Kitia|Kitia'']] 20:34, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment i do not see how these can be supported in the absence of some kind of sourcing. There may be a RS for his age, but tracing it through the various articles & web sites seems indirect. Perhaps if it can be directly sourced here the article can stand. DGG (talk) 21:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There may be more information about Mr Moreira, but it hasn't been added in a year. Captain celery 20:54, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I think it is unfair to 'batch' all these together, as each case has varying levels of weakness or acceptance. I would suggest deleting the Kimura and Okumura articles on the basis of lack of additional information. It wouldn't be difficult to expand the Moreira article, however, and at least I think we need the Nakanishi article, if not the others.Ryoung122 01:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've been thinking about the argument of high notability and low information v low notability and high information. For instance there is a very comprehensive article on Marie-Rose Mueller. But she is not notable as either someone born in France, living in America, or as a woman. Whereas Giichi Okumura is only a month younger than her, and the second oldest man in Japan, seventh worldwide. I'm not suggesting Mueller's article be deleted, since unlike the Italian woman's and the Japanese men's, it obviously required a lot of work. I know it's a ridiculous slippery slope argument, but I could say that there's a lot of information available about me, so I could have an article, even though my longevity is not notable (a century younger than Jeanne Calment). The point I'm making is that, in future, both notability and information should be required for an article to be created. Captain celery 21:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Caknuck 05:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RS and WP:N /198.70.11.153 12:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - no notability and not really any room for expansion. NASCAR Fan24^{(radio me!)} 13:14, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator Delete Since this was relisted, I thought I'd quickly add my comments again. All the dissenting non-votes seem to be focused on the fact that one or the other was "ranked" higher or lower than the others. The major point, however, that all three of these individuals lack reliable, in-depth sources (Sukesaburo Nakanishi's obit is now a dead link) has not been addressed and still stands. Cheers, CP 15:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per nom. CRGreathouse (t | c) 18:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If I were to say 'keep' it would be a losing battle now. But NASCAR Fan, I think I showed that Okumura, if not Kimura, is notable. A 111 year old man certainly is. And Nakanishi was the second oldest in the world so he was anyway. Captain celery 19:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Nakanishi.Ryoung122 00:04, 27 October 2007 (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.