Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hikari Kiyama

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. This is a WP:Soft delete; the article may be restored or userfied by any admin upon request. MelanieN (talk) 02:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hikari Kiyama

Hikari Kiyama (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Insufficient significant coverage in RS. —swpb^T 12:47, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and Comment: swpb, you need to list this at the appropriate AfD category. I will alert the appropriate WikiProjects to come over here and take a look. Adding a Keep !vote as it appears that editors are beginning to add sources. Montanabw^(talk) 22:52, 28 July 2016 (UTC) (update Montanabw^(talk) 20:43, 29 July 2016 (UTC))[reply]
  • What editors are "adding sources"? Not a single source has been added to the article since my nomination. Where are you getting this idea? I would advise the closing admin to ignore your vote, as it is apparently based on a complete falsehood. And, for future reference, no, I am not obligated to add the AfD to categories. It's a nice thing to do, and one I usually try to do, but it is very explicitly not required—and when it's not done by the nominator, it's very quickly done by someone else, as it was here. So, once again, if you're going to criticize based on policy, it would be wise for you to read that policy first. —swpb^T 12:47, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  Please get a grip and AGF. It looked like Michael Bednarek had done a bunch of cleanup, I thought there had been sources added too, it looked like someone was working on it and that was enough to put me to the keep side, at least momentarily. That said, I still am going to wait to see what music and Japanese culture editors have to say before determining if I need to change my !vote. Bottom line is that the servers aren't at capacity and there is no deadline, I'm willing to take a wait and see approach. Montanabw^(talk) 21:38, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

AGF is for the first time, even the first few times, an editor does something shady. You're way past that point with me. And even if you were commenting in good faith, should we ignore the fact that you were plain wrong? The entire basis for your vote is a falsehood, whether you knew it at the time or not; what admin would give any weight to such a vote? —swpb^T 15:08, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Again with the personal attacks. Knock it off. Montanabw^(talk) 21:47, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up: I just spent about an hour or so drilling down on the deadlinks, and found archived links for most of them. Unfortunately, many are in Dutch or German, so it's going to take someone other than me to do the review of these materials, but I do believe that the multiple citations in third-party sources independent of the subject has been met. Just once, it would be nice if people would make a good-faith effort to salvage these older articles before putting an AfD on them. Montanabw^(talk) 22:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:08, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:08, 31 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - an effort has been made to save this BLP, and it is still a mess. Sorry, but I don't see how this reaches WP:HEY or WP:BARE, much less WP:GNG by a long shot. Bearian (talk) 15:00, 12 August 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.