Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Namio Harukawa

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. ansh 666 07:42, 26 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Namio Harukawa

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable artist. Shritwod (talk) 03:03, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:27, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:27, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:27, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep It's had 108k views in 3 years, which strongly suggests notability. Do we have a porn/erotica sorting list? This is where he fits. Johnbod (talk) 18:37, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:32, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the sourcing does not show notability. We do not keep articles based on how often they are viewed.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:22, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would suggest merging somewhere, but I am not sure where. We don't seem to have a list.Seraphim System ^(talk) 13:02, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He's on a couple of lists already - see Special:WhatLinksHere/Namio_Harukawa. Body worship seems to be the only article. Johnbod (talk) 13:25, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 01:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Keep, merge (to where?) or delete?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 10:15, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as no evidence of notability, Fails ARTIST & GNG, Page views are irrelevant at AFD and there's nowhere appropriate to merge so our best option is delete. –Davey2010^Talk 20:40, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable. Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:ARTIST. No significant coverage of the artist himself from reliable sources, although he did have one notable exhibit in the Museum of Eroticism. I've added a sentence mentioning his exhibit into that article. — Newslinger talk 12:17, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Reliably sourced to here. Bus stop (talk) 13:22, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The article is by an anonymous (former) member of roomantic, which accepts user submissions without editorial control. How is this a reliable source? Vexations (talk) 11:06, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I kept an open mind, but after scanning ten uncomfortable Google pages in the search results, I added the only mainstream coverage I could find. Fails WP:GNG. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:51, 25 July 2018 (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.