Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Teppei Miwa

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 Draftify. See now Draft:Teppei Miwa. Sandstein 09:21, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Teppei Miwa

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

Teppei Miwa (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Undersourced article packed with redlinked events, shows a gymnast who although has competed at national level has never won anything at national level. Lacks SIGCOV, fails WP:GNG; WP:SPORTSPERSON. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:49, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Japan. Alexandermcnabb (talk) 05:49, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Has a WP:BEFORE been conducted using the Japanese language? Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:40, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is that a reasonable request? This is enwiki. This article links to NO Japanese language article. The English article is being judged, during New Page Patrol, 'as found'. You get an English Google and an evaluation of the sources presented as part of the free deal. You want more than that, you have to buy a subscription. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 15:38, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Likewise, search for native-language sources if the subject has a name in a non-Latin alphabet (such as Japanese or Greek), which is often in the lede." JTtheOG (talk) 23:57, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Alexandermcnabb: Yes. you are required to do WP:BEFORE prior to nominating an article, regardless of which language the sources may be in. Here are a few sources I found with a brief search of "三輪哲平 体操競技" (the first part is his name, the second part is "artistic gymnastics"):
  • Nikkan Sports (2017)
  • Nikkan Sports (2017)
  • Nikkan Sports (2018)
  • Nikkei (2019, discussion of him as part of a team)
  • Chunichi News (2021)
  • Juntendo University News (2021)
  • Nikkan Sports (2022)
  • Yahoo! Japan News (2022)
  • Sponichi News (2022)
  • Nikkei (2022)
  • I wouldn't be surprised if there were more possible sources out there. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 23:26, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    No one is required to perform BEFORE, neither on the AfD page where BEFORE resides (which is not a policy or guideline) nor on any of the relevant policy or guideline pages. JoelleJay (talk) 06:50, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails WP:NGYMNAST. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 03:16, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Teppei Miwa won a silver and a bronze at the 2018 Voronin Cup, which applies to WP:NGYMNAST criteria: Won a senior individual medal at an elite international competition. NguyenDuyAnh1995 (talk) 14:09, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    User has been blocked for socking in this AfD JoelleJay (talk) 04:29, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The 2018 Voronin Cup results. All they lack is any mention of Miwa. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:23, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The source usually separates men and women's results. With that being said an elite competition is defined as "any competition with considerable international WP:GNG coverage between at least eight notable athletes (examples of such competitions include: Pan American Games, Asian Games, Commonwealth Games, European Championships, and Pacific Rim Championships)." Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:27, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Alexandermcnabb Why do you keep saying that when Teppei Miwa was clearly the silver medalist of the 2018 Voronin Cup? Type "2018 Voronin Cup" on Google on there'll be a picture of him on the podium. NguyenDuyAnh1995 (talk) 11:35, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero Parlez Moi 12:19, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete (see later comment). None of the articles linked count towards GNG; they are all routine results announcements, insubstantial youth coverage, press releases, interviews with associates, refactored press releases on a scoring error that happened to affect him, or non-independent profiles by his school/team. JoelleJay (talk) 06:52, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment the article doesn’t fail WP:GNG as the FIG link describes the gymnast’s information directly & in details, & FIG is a reliable source & independent of the gymnast himself. NguyenDuyAnh1995 (talk) 11:41, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    You already voted above. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 17:16, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @NguyenDuyAnh1995, do you mean his FIG profile? Stats databases like that never, ever contribute to notability as they are indiscriminate and do not contain prose analysis. Also, even if the Voronin Cup was at the competition caliber needed by NGYMNAST, Miwa would still need to meet GNG to be notable. JoelleJay (talk) 17:50, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @JoelleJay in WP:INDISCRIMINATE, there’s no requirement of the sources as you said, & in WP:WHATSIGCOV there’s no compulsory of prose as well. As the source meets the WP:GNG criterion of significant coverage (describing the gymnast’s information directly & in details), reliable (as FIG is reliable in gymnastics) & independent (as the FIG is independent of the gymnast himself), the article passes WP:GNG. NguyenDuyAnh1995 (talk) 20:45, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @NguyenDuyAnh1995 No, stats databases are not SIGCOV and do not contribute to notability. See WP:SPORTCRIT: Trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may be used to support content in an article, but it is not sufficient to establish notability. This includes listings in database sources with low, wide-sweeping generic standards of inclusion ... Although statistics sites may be reliable sources, they are not sufficient by themselves to establish notability. FIG is also not independent, as it is the governing body for his sport and therefore has a vested interest in the type and amount of coverage he receives. JoelleJay (talk) 22:19, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @JoelleJay The criteria above is applied to trivial coverage. If the whole page is about one person, not listings in database sources with low, wide-sweeping generic standards of inclusion, it’s not WP:TRIVIALMENTION. Also, according to Cambridge dictionary, vested interest means a strong personal interest in something because you could get an advantage from it. What can the FIG get advantage from Teppei Miwa’s birthdate, birthplace, high school/college team, idol & injury information? NguyenDuyAnh1995 (talk) 23:57, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @JoelleJay The Fig link is also not statistics. Statistical database typically contain parameter data and the measured data for these parameters. NguyenDuyAnh1995 (talk) 00:10, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The criteria above are defining trivial coverage and giving examples of it specific to sports, including what are clearly sports statistics databases (not the same thing as a "statistical database"). This is not debatable. See, e.g., the numerous AfDs where results databases/stats profiles (and governing sports bodies) were explicitly rejected from counting toward GNG. And what purpose do you think FIG, or FIFA, or the IOC serves? Each is focused on promoting their sport(s), which obviously includes promoting positive coverage of their competitors. It also means their interest in a subject is not reflective of the general public's interest in it, just like how student body president candidates profiled in a college newspaper do not reflect the actual notability of those people outside the college. JoelleJay (talk) 01:17, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @JoelleJay Firstly, just because some deletion discussion mentioned it doesn’t make it right, especially when it’s not written on any WP article. The FIG link is not trivial coverage as in WP:TRIVIALMENTION, or in WP:SPORTCRIT (no definition). Secondly, google “ what is statistics database” & see if there is any results showing any definition different from Statistical database, as you claim. Thirdly, how can creating a profile of an athlete help to promote the sport? Does that lure more fans & investments? No. It would be vested interest with the teams that supply Miwa with facilities & medical condition like Juntento University, Seifu Highschool, or JGA if he competes in international tournaments, as his results & prize will bring money & reputation to them. But the FIG does not. They can get advantage of the popularity of those like Simone Biles, Aliya Mustafina...but through their performance & media coverage, not profiles on their websites. NguyenDuyAnh1995 (talk) 04:47, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    "Some deletion discussion" -- I linked multiple AfDs where sports database sources were uncontroversially disregarded when considering GNG. And it is written down: our guidelines literally exclude statistics sites/databases, which FIG and other things like sports-reference.com (the very first result when I type in "sports statistics database") and soccerway etc. indisputably are. And if you don't understand how a business can profit off of promoting its membership, or why its coverage of its own members reflects the interests of the organization rather than the world at large (in the exact same way a corporate profile written by HR does not demonstrate independent detailed coverage of someone's career), then you need to seriously take some time familiarizing yourself with en.wp community standards before contributing at AfD. At this point you're getting into WP:IDHT territory. JoelleJay (talk) 05:43, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @JoelleJay in sports-reference.com, data is collected statistically with parameters & measured values as it is defined in Statistical database. So the FIG link has nothing related to whatever statistic. You can see it in the example of Brenna Stewart. Also, as I said before, Miwa’s profile only benefit the teams that supplies him with facilities & medical condition, such as Seifu, Juntendo or JGA. He’s not a member of the FIG, but is for his club & national team. NguyenDuyAnh1995 (talk) 06:19, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, pure results lists are PRIMARY data so are further excluded from GNG. JoelleJay (talk) 22:28, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Even though I agree that Miwa passes the WP:NGYMNASTICS as the runner-up of 2018 Voronin Cup & the sources (including the one in External Link) are enough for WP:GNG, many are still discussing and hilariously citing WP criterion that do not support their opinions. So I added this Yahoo Link about Miwa and you can find lots of information there, from his birthdate, birthplace, junior club, education...written in prose, with Yahoo is a reliable, secondary & independent source to meet WP:GNG. 113.190.111.42 (talk) 06:30, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
User has been blocked for socking in this AfD JoelleJay (talk) 04:29, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:GNG. I hope that isn’t a sockpuppet above me. Fats40boy11 (talk) 16:02, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Nope, that's a genuine new IP editor who didn't come rocketing straight to this AfD off the back of a vote on a related AfD a couple weeks ago. Oh no. Totes legit. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 16:12, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Alexandermcnabb I saw that IP the other day on a similar AFD and raised an eyebrow. Definitely nothing fishy going on there and isn’t trying to influence the vote, not. Fats40boy11 (talk) 16:15, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fats40boy11 since you’re making a WP:GNG fail claim, can you be more in details? For example, is this source, which contains information such as Miwa’s birthdate, birthplace, education, club, some notable results, not counted as significant coverage? Or Yahoo News Japan is not a reliable source? Or Yahoo News Japan is associated or has vested interest in Miwa or gymnastics in general so it might be not independent? 113.190.111.42 (talk) 16:29, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yahoo News Japan isn’t available in the UK or EEA anymore, so I can’t see it, and can’t make any further comments on this source. Fats40boy11 (talk) 17:36, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Fats40boy11 so I see that you can’t access to the source, which means you have no idea if the source is significant coverage, reliable & independent. Hence your “fails GNG” claim is invalid. 113.190.111.42 (talk) 17:47, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    It is valid as it isn’t viewable to me or anyone else in these regions. I don’t know what’s in the article, and you haven’t provided other sources. As I said below, please provide other sources which all regions can view. Fats40boy11 (talk) 17:53, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Fats40boy11: Here is the link to the Yahoo Japan feature article via Wayback Machine, which you should be able to access. Cielquiparle (talk) 22:56, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you @Cielquiparle as always. I’ll have a look at it in more depth in the morning when I have a greater opportunity to go through it thoroughly. Fats40boy11 (talk) 23:02, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment one of the delete vote above says that Yahoo News Japan isn’t available in UK or EEA & can’t see it, which means he has no idea if the source is significant coverage, reliable & independent. Therefore, his “fails GNG” claim is invalid. 113.190.111.42 (talk) 17:47, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn’t. I can’t see anything and so therefore cannot verify it (unless if some in the UK or EEA can find a way round this). One source is not everything, and you are grasping at straws. From what I have, the article fails WP:GNG. Unless you can provide other sources, this remains the case. Please do not claim a vote is ‘invalid’ because it does no agree with your point of view. Fats40boy11 (talk) 17:50, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Fats40boy11 you can only claim that the source fails WP:GNG if it doesn’t any of the criterion, not because you can’t view it. In Vietnam or Laos, BBC News is forbidden, so does that mean anyone living there can claim that any citation from that website fails GNG even though it meets every criteria? Or the same thing with China & tons of websites forbidden there? Take the example of grading a restaurant with Michelin stars, can you claim that it fails the criterion because you have never eaten there? Your claim is invalid because the problem is yours, not the source. According to Is it down right now? Yahoo News Japan is still working. 113.190.111.42 (talk) 18:32, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Again, do not claim any point of view is invalid, it will only cause more problems down the line. I will no longer engage with you in discussion if you do this again.
    I have explained how I cannot view it, and will not explain my previous points again. We should wherever possible use sources that everyone can see no matter of their location. Not everyone has the means to get around this. The same would go for Vietnam or Laos. If your confident that the article passes WP:GNG, then prove it by other sources. I am basing my judgement on the whole article, not one source that I cannot currently view. In my own WP:BEFORE, I have not found anything. I have repeatedly asked for other sources in a respectful manner, but you have been unable to provide and have instead tried to attack and shut down my view as invalid. Fats40boy11 (talk) 18:45, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Quote from WP:SOURCEACCESS: Do not reject reliable sources just because they are difficult or costly to access. Some reliable sources are not easily accessible. For example, an online source may require payment, and a print-only source may be available only through libraries. Rare historical sources may even be available only in special museum collections and archives. If you have trouble accessing a source, others may be able to do so on your behalf. 113.190.111.42 (talk) 19:34, 28 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Boom went the sock... Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 07:04, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don’t believe the Yahoo article is enough on its own to save the page upon review. I’m not saying it isn’t relevant, but I’m not confident that parts are entirely independent of the subject. For example, in one section, he is described as the “inverted prince who has never failed” by a coach that has worked with the subject in the past. There are some sections that are more relevant than others, but I am still of the belief that more sources are needed to establish notability. Therefore, my view as of now is unchanged as I do not believe that the Yahoo article is enough to save the page. If anyone can find any other sources that may help, then please leave them below. Fats40boy11 (talk) 08:10, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Just to clarify my viewpoint, I don’t have any objections to the Yahoo article being used, but believe as parts of it include individuals that have worked with him before, I don’t think that this is enough to sway me and we should look to include other sources as well. Others may have different opinions on this.
    The Yahoo source is referenced after saying that he has become one of the ‘top’ and ‘most promising’ competitors in Japan. I’m not sure that anywhere in the Yahoo source it explicitly says that, and I think we have to be careful when it comes to such claims unless properly referenced by independent sources. (I’m not arguing whether he is or not, but explaining that it needs to be properly referenced)
    Overall, I wouldn’t be against the article being kept if we can establish that he is indeed notable, but at the moment, I still haven’t been convinced that he is notable. Fats40boy11 (talk) 11:28, 29 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify. After looking over the Yahoo article, I do think it provides significant independent commentary from the author...but that makes one potentially SIGCOV source, which I agree with Fats40boy11 is insufficient for GNG. However, given the difficulty in accessing Japanese media I can recognize the possibility of further coverage, so I'm changing my !vote to draftify or userfy to give others with better access a chance to find more SIGCOV sources. JoelleJay (talk) 04:23, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify Upon the above statement by JoellyJay, I think it’s correct to allow users time to find sources and have now been swayed. This will give users time to find and improve the article instead of deleting it straight away. If necessary, we can review the article at some point in the future. However, the article in my opinion does not currently pass WP:GNG, and this needs to be fixed. Fats40boy11 (talk) 06:55, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify WP:NOTPROMO, notability concerns as per JoelleJay. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:27, 5 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Draftify: There are issues and this is a good ATD. -- Otr500 (talk) 15:03, 6 August 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Teppei_Miwa&oldid=1103096955"