Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sotaro Tojima

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. J04n(talk page) 18:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sotaro Tojima

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

Notability. Ref 1 is a directory. Ref 2 is an interview (good for notability). Ref 3 is an interview, but not about him, it's about a game he worked on.

He hasn't received significant coverage in reliable sources. I was the one who added the references after trying to expand the article. James086 ^Talk 18:36, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:50, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:50, 6 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:22, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Cited sources are about things he's worked on not him and are Wikipedia:NOT INHERITED. Not notable under WP:BIO DavidTTTaylor (talk) 17:18, 13 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I searched for Japanese sources and found a few. First, the Wikipedia JP article cites this English source that is not included in the English one. For sources in Japanese, I found this rather detailed interview in which he talks a lot about himself beyond Halo. The same site, Famitsu.com (which is related to Famitsu I believe) has other articles that mention him, but this one, about a lecture he gave about his work, is the most detailed of the rest. This report on Halo 4 includes a longish interview with Tojima that includes information on his background. This is report on the same event, with a sidebar on Tojima, but since it is from xbox.com, it might not be seen as independent. Right now, I am borderline, leaning keep, but since I don't know game sites, I can't say how reliable all these are. Michitaro (talk) 00:38, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- The first Famitsu article is good for asserting notability (whether one article constitutes "significant coverage" is another matter), the second is just about a game he worked on. Famitsu is definitely a reliable source for video game articles. Gamasutra is also reliable, but they are just paraphrasing a press release by his employer. The Japanese xbox.com page and the Game Watch interview are just about the game he worked on. Thanks for those, I find it hard enough to read Japanese articles even once they have been translated (hopefully one day the automatic translators will be perfect). James086^Talk 17:37, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thanks for the evaluations. I did, however, find the second Famitsu piece to be about more than just the game he worked on. It is a report on his lecture at a university conference on game design, where he uses one game as his main example, but generally talks about his approach to sound design. There were several other Famitsu articles that mention him which I did not introduce because they were really just about the games. This one was different. Michitaro (talk) 17:50, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Haha, it seems that the meaning of the second article was quite literally lost in translation. James086 ^Talk 18:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 09:17, 21 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Two sources do not constitute sufficient reliable sources for a whole article, there needs to be evidence of more or it should be deleted. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:40, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A reasonable search for sources brings up nothing directly detailing the subject himself. Current page lacks sufficient reliable sources to justify a keep outcome. Would have no problem with restoration or userfication if adequate sources about the subject were found. BusterD (talk) 16:33, 28 March 2013 (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.