Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reiko Ōmori

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 23:31, 29 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Reiko Ōmori

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

Near-empty article which is a biography of a living person with no evidence of any kind of achievement or notability beyond a role as a voice actor. JoshuSasori (talk) 23:34, 15 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. 19:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 19:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. 19:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 19:28, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. 19:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC) • Gene93k (talk) 19:29, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. --Calathan (talk) 21:04, 16 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Can't seem to find enough reliable sources in either Japanese or English. Since I have a high standard for WP:ENTERTAINER, I don't think it passes that one either. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:49, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Changing !vote to Keep per the coverage by Hitoshi Doi found below. If we can actually find those magazine articles, the article can go a long way. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 23:06, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What would the article contain though? I don't see what evidence there is in those articles that she is more than just yet another photogenic here-today-gone-tomorrow pretty girl. And it is already "tomorrow", nine years past her heyday, and she has gone. JoshuSasori (talk) 23:59, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand your points, I don't think they have anything to do with Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Articles don't have to be long, coverage doesn't have to be recent, and why someone received coverage is immaterial. Even if she was just another pretty girl, if magazines devoted pages to her, I think she qualifies for an article. Calathan (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Qualifies for an article saying what? "Reiko Omori is a cutie from Japan who had some photos of her published in a magazine in 1999" - end of article. JoshuSasori (talk) 07:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, based on the coverage listed on Hitoshi Doi's page. He lists her as having been covered in articles in 21 magazines [1] (for magazines with links on that page, you can click the link for more information on their contents). Though some of those appear to have just been small bits of coverage, the Bomb August 1999 issue devoted 32 pages and the cover to her [2], and the Toukou Shashin January 1999 issue devoted 5 pages (plus a fan picture) and the cover to her [3]. Hitoshi Doi also descibes an event she headlined as having the most press coverage of any anime or seiyuu event he had ever attended [4]. I think in total the coverage of her amounts to enough to pass WP:N. Though it may be difficult to actually obtain copies of the articles about her, just knowning that they exist is enough to justify having an article about her. Note that about Hitoshi Doi, his website is genereally considered a reliable source on seiyuu, as he has been interviewed or otherwise treated as an expert by reliable sources. I wouldn't consider his page significant coverage in and of itself, but it is a trustworthy source for determining what other coverage seiyuu have had. Calathan (talk) 16:15, 18 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Neither the "Bomb" magazine nor the "Toukou Shashin" magazine has an article about them in English Wikipedia. "Bomb" is a glamour photography magazine, and "Toukou Shashin" is a defunct publication that cannot easily be found on an internet search. I don't think that photos of a pretty girl in Japanese-language publications from thirteen years ago merits an English-language wikipedia article. JoshuSasori (talk) 01:34, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Having an article on Wikipedia has nothing to do with being a reliable source. Calathan (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure these magazines are a "reliable source" of photos of cuties, not so sure they are a good reason for a wikipedia article. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Magazines are still magazines, even if they don't have articles on the English Wikipedia. Magazines are usually considered reliable sources, so even if they don;t have an article, if the articles are shown to be actual coverage, then notability is established. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 04:30, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"if they don;t have an article, if the articles are shown to be actual coverage, then notability is established" - I cannot understand this. JoshuSasori (talk) 07:14, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not all magazines have articles, in the same way that not all books have articles. Nevertheless, such periodicals can still be considered reliable sources if they are shown to be an expert in the field and/or have some sort of editorial staff. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 07:16, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me for arguing about semantics but it's not a "reliable source" of anything if the magazine has just pictures of her in a swimming costume. What on earth the "field" would be I'm not sure - the academic study of girls in bikinies? Anyway, enough said on this topic. JoshuSasori (talk) 07:22, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do want to point out that the Bomb magazine apparently has 16 pages of text related to her in addition to 16 pages of pictures. I have no idea what sort of information is included in that text, but the magazine coverage isn't only pictures. Calathan (talk) 13:02, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

contents page - I have no idea what sort of information is included in that text - A wild guess would be things like "what's your favourite colour/food/pop group?", "who was your first love?" and "what kind of boys do you like?" I'm sure it's very charming but not sure why Wikipedia needs to cover it. JoshuSasori (talk) 01:12, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the mere fact that she is the subject of significant coverage by reliable sources should be enough to establish notability. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 01:30, 21 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Not seeing sufficient third-party coverage or sourcing to justify a self-standing biographical article like this. --DAJF (talk) 00:16, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I've noticed that the Japanese Wikipedia page for her lists her under a different name (apparently she changed from using her real name to a stage name), lists her as having done something as recently as 2009, and includes a source that appears to be minutes from the Diet of Japan. I can't read Japanese, but I was wondering if anyone here can tell if any of that is useful information or would be helpful to find more sources. I'm particularly curious about why minutes from the Diet are included as a source in the article. Calathan (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The diet stuff is about a problem with her working late at night while still of school age. JoshuSasori (talk) 02:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Regarding the Diet minutes: In 1999 she was on a live broadcast on Mainichi Radio in Osaka for a late-night program. Osaka Police hit Horipro and the radio broadcaster with charges for violating national child labor laws. The reason this was a floor debate was because Johnny's Jr. was doing the same thing with their underage talent but never charged. She was never mentioned by name. Jun Kayama 04:00, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - She's gone through three names. She debuted in 1996 as Reiko Ōmori with Horipro. She changed to Rei Aihara in 2005 when she switched agencies to Eldie Media Works. She quit that in 2009 to focus on a music career and now her name is Ray, fronting for a band called Rainy UNGLEBUN [5] which, by the way, just had their farewell performance on 7/28 so it doesn't exist anymore. I'm reserving judgment on this one. Jun Kayama 03:43, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, despite the actual stub would suggest a very-very-low profile person, close to a BLP1E case, looking at Japanese WP IMHO the sum of her activities make her quite notable: in addition of voice acting she worked on radio, had regular roles on several TV-dramas and shows, released multiple singles and albums, was protagonist of photo books and gravure videos, appeared in commercials. Let's add that, as noticed above, she was subject of significant coverage by reliable sources, there is enough for me to pass the notability bar. Cavarrone (talk) 06:56, 22 August 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, Black Kite (talk) 00:19, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A notable voice acting role for a major character on a notable series, and also has been featured in a lot of books and magazines [6]. Dream Focus 22:17, 23 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The article may be a stub, but any position that there is no evidence of achievement or notability is clearly misguided. Absence of a plethora of WP:RS in the article is not proof of absence with regard to such sources. Jun Kayama 07:56, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BEFORE - please don't give up so easily looking for possible sources. Bearian (talk) 15:07, 29 August 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.