726:. So for fan-based anime organizations, do they have to 'sell' something to be notable? I should think not. Now let's go back to 'reliable'. What would be a reliable source for a fan-based contest? Who would be considered 'experts' for saimoe? The fans are, or more specific, fan blogs. If you ask for blogs who follow Anime Saimoe Tournament from day to day, year to year, then we have plenty. They are definitely not traditional reliable sources, but they are logically the most reliable for the subject. If these arguments do not pass, then I would have to conclude that any fan-based activity, no matter how big, will never be notable enough, unless they put something on amazon.com or similar, or unless it is endorsed by an anime corporation (which makes it no longer fan-based). And third, forum-based competitions are not notable, I suspect, would be because of its narrow and concentrated platform. As mentioned before, no registration is needed to vote in Saimoe. But more importantly, the open forum is only used as a place to cast a ballot. Saimoe does not 'only' exist on 2chan but is followed in many anime communities around the world. So therefore, we cannot view Anime Saimoe Tournament as a forum-based competition, because it is does not have the restrictions of one. There is a site that keeps tracks of all saimoe information from its start until now. It is not a blog, rather a statistics site, and it is third-party. However, it is, like it should be, fan-based. It is indeed sad how that mere fact will keep the source from ever being reliable.
399:, the leading English-language anime news website, it is clearly more than just a one-in-a-billion forum game. Also, to reply to your comment on ANN in the deletion rational above, being a reliable source and being notable enough for an article are completely separate things. I don't know if Anime News Network is notable enough that it should have its own article, but it is certainly a reliable source, and has been accepted as such in many previous deletion discussions, as well as in featured article nominations. Contrary to what
614:
claim. What should happen if, for the rest of the world, the majority's view differs from the view expressed in both B language article and C language article? The Korean version of this article indirectly went through deletion challenge by myself, when I contended that Best Moe
Tournament article and Anime Saimoe Tournament article's notability should not be treated differently.
747:. There has been some minor coverage of the contest by reliable third-party sources, such as Anime News Network. But it is not enough to justify a stand-alone article. The Moe contests section itself should be trimmed to only included contests that have received some coverage by reliable third-party sources or are organized by a notable organizations. —
814:
turn up no shortage of hits from sites already used as RSs. There are at least 2 articles just on the tournament from ANN - that's 2 N-providing from one of our most relied-upon RSs (Starblind's derision notwithstanding). There are 2 articles on it by japanator.com (another longstanding RS accepted
721:
I see that the main concern here is notability. First, note that this whole contest is fan-based and anime-related. It is not sponsored by any anime corporations or the like. So the question becomes, how could something fan-based become notable enough? Reliable sources (third-party) for anime/manga
528:
exist. Why should they keep these two articles separate in
Japanese article instead of merging them with article for American Football, and give it just a line or two? If you say Japanese Article should merge all American Football related articles into one article discussing American Football, then
560:
Please avoid such argumentation with your shallow understanding of
Wikimedia. Each wiki community is entitled a total liberty to set their inclusions guidelines the way they saw fit per consensus. The fact that this article exists in other wikis doesn't matter. All matter is whatever this article
403:
suggests, Anime News
Network does not cover everything anime related, and coverage by Anime News Network shows some notability. However, coverage by only one reliable source does not show enough notability to justify an article. Furthermore, since Anime News Network is mainly just reporting the
613:
What if for 'Event A', B language article claims 'B people are the victims. C people are the murderers' , while C language article claims 'C people are the victims. B people are the murderers'? Both can claim plenty of research papers from their respective academic institutions to back up their
598:
There is nothing contradictory about one wiki choosing to include an article and a second wiki not choosing to include an article. The
English Knowledge, for example, allows fair use images - thousands upon thousands of them - while the German Knowledge (and many others) flatly forbid fair use
646:
Funny, that if i return our argumentation, i can also conclude that Best Moe
Tournament should also be send to AfD. Then again you are showing your lack of experience of the English wikipedia and no desire to hear others indications. For information you argument is right on the spot of
599:
images. No one blinks an eye at such an enormous disparity in article quality because we respect communities' right to choose what content they carry. That other wikis carry the Saimoe article is somewhat informative, but far from a solid argument: it's basically
452:
Received some not in-depth coverage by the #1 anime website in the
English speaking work that does carry some weight unless you are in full denial mode. However the coverage is limited and notability requires non trivial coverage from multiples reliable sources.
270:
I see. That's a very interesting reason to discount ANN coverage. I'll remember that in the future: 'Delete - the Wall Street
Journal will cover anything remotely related to business.' 'Delete: Publisher's Weekly will cover anything remotely related to books.'
533:
and
Chinese Saimoe, both of which has received votes of more than ten thousand votes. I also challenge your statement of mere forum competition, as registration in a forum is not required to vote in Anime Saimoe Tournament, nor Best Moe
669:
Best Moe
Tournament is not a Forum poll. I am troubled by you implying that you can consider Best Moe Tournament deletion merely from reading what I wrote. Visit Best Moe Tournament English Webpage yourself before making the claim,
169:
579:
Thus are two wiki communities allowed to state contradicting statements? Can wiki article in one language claim 'Event A' happened, while the other language claim 'Event A' never happened or it is a fabricated lie?
618:. Shouldn't the fact that at least one group of wiki administrator found the Anime Saimoe Tournament article, and thus Best Moe Tournament article, valid for Wiki entry be considered for this discussion?
200:
An online forum competition to find the most popular anime, nothing to suggest its remotely notable, all the sources are first party. Prod was declined on the basis that the competion has an article on
484:
Existence on another language wikipedia is not justification for keeping an article, every language has different criteria for notability, and none of those other articles have any better sources--
615:
698:
As i don't read Japanese, i have neutrally asked for inputs others members of the anime/manga project to get a look at this one and the other. Let others see what your 3 links are worths. --
290:
163:
124:
404:
outcome of the tournament, I'm not sure it could be considered in-depth coverage. Unless in-depth coverage from multiple reliable sources is found, the tournament doesn't meet
616:
http://ko.wikipedia.org/%EC%9C%84%ED%82%A4%EB%B0%B1%EA%B3%BC:%EC%82%AD%EC%A0%9C_%ED%86%A0%EB%A1%A0/%EC%B5%9C%EA%B3%A0_%EB%AA%A8%EC%97%90_%ED%86%A0%EB%84%88%EB%A8%BC%ED%8A%B8
520:. The gazetteer aspect should allow talk of subjects that is of importance to a region. Let us also consider following case. Most people in Japan don't even know
529:
you are claiming there to be no uniform standard of Knowledge for the entire world. Finally, Anime Saimoe Tournament has spawned at two international events, the
684:
Also check 3 links to Japanese news article I have added to the Anime Saimoe Tournament and rule on whether they meet the standard on the reliable sources.
97:
92:
315:
article, as this Saimoe "popularity contest" is relevant to that article. I, myself, constructed the Saimoe table as seen in the moe article originally.
101:
129:
84:
825:). sgcafe.com has honored it with 3 or 4 articles. Gigazine.net seems to have even more articles focusing on Saimoe, and it too is accepted as a
811:
371:
Merge what? There is nothing in either article to suggest this "tournament" is anything more than one of a billion unimportant forum games--
770:
851:
And this is just the English Internet. As I think has already been pointed out, one would expect most of the sources to be in Japanese. --
834:
184:
151:
408:
and doesn't justify a standalone article. I don't know if the coverage is enough to justify including the tournament in the main
561:
provide sufficient elements to pass any English wikipedia relevant inclusion guidelines which is unfortunately not the case. --
17:
794:
758:
846:
is close-mouthed, but there are 2 obvious hits in it for the tournament. Likely a LexisNexis search would turn up more hits.
145:
843:
88:
889:
798:
778:
762:
735:
707:
693:
679:
664:
627:
589:
570:
543:
495:
479:
462:
444:
421:
382:
366:
345:
324:
302:
261:
234:
216:
66:
855:
839:
607:
470:
This article has entries in 4 other languages. Either delete all 4 other language entry for this, or keep this article
275:
412:
article. Pehaps just a mention in that article would be appropriate, rather than the amount of coverage it has now.
141:
648:
600:
904:
723:
36:
903:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
521:
341:
191:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
774:
80:
72:
731:
505:
530:
362:
689:
675:
623:
585:
539:
475:
242:
ANN will cover anything remotely related to anime, so no additional notability can be inferred there.
205:
which itself seems to barely meet notability standards (and is also almost entirely first party ref'd
157:
703:
660:
566:
458:
337:
177:
685:
671:
619:
581:
535:
471:
226:
790:
754:
504:
Existence in another language wikipedia must be considered for the following Knowledge principle
493:
440:
417:
396:
380:
298:
214:
202:
866:
Gwern makes a very convincing case. Don't just dismiss something because it sounds ridiculous.
829:
in ~30 articles here. Saimoe rankings, like Newtype or Animage poll rankings, are reported in a
435:, per my above reply. The tournament doesn't have enough coverage to justify its own article.
727:
230:
49:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
867:
358:
320:
852:
604:
272:
769:
Hmm, out of curiosity. How much weight (if any) does Sankaku carry in this discussion?
699:
656:
562:
454:
400:
243:
48:. Continuation of merge/redirect discussion on the article's talk page is encouraged.
785:
749:
651:
but you did not get a look at it don't you? Bottom line continues your argumentative
509:
485:
436:
413:
372:
294:
206:
655:
by putting forward every single listed "bad arguments" usually found during AfD. --
336:
the information in the article including the table can be rewritten using prose. -
118:
744:
409:
405:
354:
333:
316:
312:
525:
517:
513:
652:
820:. There are ~2 articles by dannychoo.com (another RS, used in : -->
897:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
833:, and mainstream media sources cite the Saimoe tournament; eg
722:"titles" are usually links to manga/anime sellers, such as
830:
826:
822:
817:
114:
110:
106:
508:: It incorporates elements of general and specialized
176:
291:
list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
907:). No further edits should be made to this page.
190:
8:
357:(with suitable trimming and reformatting). —
815:by the Anime Wikiproject and used in : -->
285:
289:: This debate has been included in the
783:Since it is a personal blog, not any. —
7:
24:
395:As the tournament is covered by
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
890:22:30, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
799:20:54, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
779:19:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
763:13:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
736:20:28, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
708:21:49, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
694:21:20, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
680:21:12, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
665:20:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
628:19:49, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
610:18:31 25 September 2010 (GMT)
590:18:22, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
571:17:50, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
544:15:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
496:15:33, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
480:14:45, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
463:06:41, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
445:01:41, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
422:01:41, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
383:22:46, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
367:21:18, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
346:13:29, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
325:06:07, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
303:04:41, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
262:03:49, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
235:01:55, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
217:23:07, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
67:05:06, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
1:
858:23:31 28 September 2010 (GMT)
278:22:26 28 September 2010 (GMT)
831:number of character articles
311:. Recommend merging to the
924:
900:Please do not modify it.
745:Moe (slang)#Moe contests
522:Bowl_Championship_Series
355:Moe (slang)#Moe contests
334:Moe (slang)#Moe contests
32:Please do not modify it.
506:Knowledge:Five_pillars
81:Anime Saimoe Tournament
73:Anime Saimoe Tournament
649:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
601:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
531:Best_Moe_Tournament
397:Anime News Network
353:to parent article
203:Anime News Network
44:The result was
305:
915:
902:
886:
883:
880:
877:
874:
871:
491:
488:
378:
375:
259:
256:
253:
250:
212:
209:
195:
194:
180:
132:
122:
104:
64:
34:
923:
922:
918:
917:
916:
914:
913:
912:
911:
905:deletion review
898:
884:
881:
878:
875:
872:
869:
489:
486:
450:Merge or delete
433:Merge or delete
376:
373:
257:
254:
251:
248:
210:
207:
137:
128:
95:
79:
76:
60:
56:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
921:
919:
910:
909:
893:
892:
860:
859:
848:
847:
804:
803:
802:
801:
771:99.140.204.109
766:
765:
738:
715:
714:
713:
712:
711:
710:
682:
643:
642:
641:
640:
639:
638:
637:
636:
635:
634:
633:
632:
631:
630:
593:
592:
574:
573:
551:
550:
549:
548:
547:
546:
499:
498:
465:
447:
429:
428:
427:
426:
425:
424:
401:User:Starblind
388:
387:
386:
385:
348:
338:Knowledgekid87
327:
306:
282:
281:
280:
279:
265:
264:
244:Andrew Lenahan
237:
198:
197:
134:
130:AfD statistics
75:
70:
58:
54:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
920:
908:
906:
901:
895:
894:
891:
888:
887:
865:
862:
861:
857:
854:
850:
849:
845:
841:
838:
837:
832:
828:
824:
819:
813:
809:
806:
805:
800:
796:
792:
788:
787:
782:
781:
780:
776:
772:
768:
767:
764:
760:
756:
752:
751:
746:
742:
739:
737:
733:
729:
725:
720:
717:
716:
709:
705:
701:
697:
696:
695:
691:
687:
683:
681:
677:
673:
668:
667:
666:
662:
658:
654:
650:
645:
644:
629:
625:
621:
617:
612:
611:
609:
606:
602:
597:
596:
595:
594:
591:
587:
583:
578:
577:
576:
575:
572:
568:
564:
559:
558:
557:
556:
555:
554:
553:
552:
545:
541:
537:
532:
527:
523:
519:
515:
511:
510:encyclopedias
507:
503:
502:
501:
500:
497:
494:
492:
483:
482:
481:
477:
473:
469:
466:
464:
460:
456:
451:
448:
446:
442:
438:
434:
431:
430:
423:
419:
415:
411:
407:
402:
398:
394:
393:
392:
391:
390:
389:
384:
381:
379:
370:
369:
368:
364:
360:
356:
352:
349:
347:
343:
339:
335:
331:
328:
326:
322:
318:
314:
310:
307:
304:
300:
296:
292:
288:
284:
283:
277:
274:
269:
268:
267:
266:
263:
260:
245:
241:
238:
236:
232:
228:
224:
221:
220:
219:
218:
215:
213:
204:
193:
189:
186:
183:
179:
175:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
143:
140:
139:Find sources:
135:
131:
126:
120:
116:
112:
108:
103:
99:
94:
90:
86:
82:
78:
77:
74:
71:
69:
68:
65:
63:
62:
61:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
899:
896:
868:
863:
844:Google Books
835:
807:
784:
748:
740:
728:KholdStare88
724:this article
718:
467:
449:
432:
350:
329:
308:
286:
247:
239:
225:Per nom. --
222:
199:
187:
181:
173:
166:
160:
154:
148:
138:
53:
52:
51:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
812:CSE results
534:Tournament.
359:Quasirandom
164:free images
856:(contribs)
608:(contribs)
526:Super_Bowl
518:gazetteers
276:(contribs)
57:rbitrarily
700:KrebMarkt
657:KrebMarkt
563:KrebMarkt
455:KrebMarkt
836:The Star
823:articles
818:articles
741:Redirect
514:almanacs
437:Calathan
414:Calathan
321:Talk:キュウ
295:Calathan
125:View log
686:Maglor1
672:Maglor1
670:please.
653:seppuku
620:Maglor1
582:Maglor1
536:Maglor1
472:Maglor1
170:WP refs
158:scholar
98:protect
93:history
516:, and
317:KyuuA4
240:Delete
223:Delete
142:Google
102:delete
885:Focus
853:Gwern
840:twice
810:. My
786:Farix
750:Farix
605:Gwern
490:16888
377:16888
351:Merge
330:Merge
309:Merge
273:Gwern
211:16888
185:JSTOR
146:books
119:views
111:watch
107:links
16:<
864:Keep
808:Keep
775:talk
732:talk
719:Keep
704:talk
690:talk
676:talk
661:talk
624:talk
603:. --
586:talk
567:talk
540:talk
476:talk
468:Keep
459:talk
441:talk
418:talk
406:WP:N
363:talk
342:talk
299:talk
293:. --
287:Note
231:talk
178:FENS
152:news
115:logs
89:talk
85:edit
821:20
816:40
743:to
524:or
487:Jac
410:moe
374:Jac
332:to
313:moe
255:bli
208:Jac
192:TWL
127:•
123:– (
842:.
827:RS
797:)
793:|
777:)
761:)
757:|
734:)
706:)
692:)
678:)
663:)
626:)
588:)
569:)
542:)
512:,
478:)
461:)
453:--
443:)
420:)
365:)
344:)
323:)
301:)
271:--
258:nd
252:ar
249:St
246:-
233:)
227:E♴
172:)
117:|
113:|
109:|
105:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
882:m
879:a
876:e
873:r
870:D
795:c
791:t
789:(
773:(
759:c
755:t
753:(
730:(
702:(
688:(
674:(
659:(
622:(
584:(
565:(
538:(
474:(
457:(
439:(
416:(
361:(
340:(
319:(
297:(
229:(
196:)
188:·
182:·
174:·
167:·
161:·
155:·
149:·
144:(
136:(
133:)
121:)
83:(
59:0
55:A
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.