602:
Maybe they are hard because we are talking about
Taiwanese news sources (not the easier to find and check) and because the article is not a week old but dates back to 2003! Yet the article underlines the media coverage even in the summary "... a string of public appearances that won her massive media
571:
article mentions her agent, but indeed it is 100% about Ozawa. Among other things, the article refers to "the phenomenon that a former porn star from Japan could create such huge buzz among
Taiwanese audiences and whether there is a change in social values about sex", her "tremendous popularity" and
545:
piece can't be dismissed out of hand, but it's more about her agent's efforts to generate publicity than the subject herself, and contains little or no significant biographical content. In the absence of a solid claim that the subject at least approaches PORNBIO requirements, and given that none of
707:
I'm sure you are right about that but the reason why on-line databases get weaker with age is that the people uploading to digital conentrate on the stuff that is really important. So not making the cut probably supports the deletion case. I respect the view you have put forward but have you
672:
returnes only 42 matches while the word "film" gives only 68 results, i.e. irrealistic numbers for a complete archive. To make a comparison, if you makes the same search for the year 2014, you'll find 284 matches for "actress" and 783 matches for "film".
525:
and the relevant articles are non-tabloidesque, significant coverage, enough for a claim of notability and also enough to start building a decent start-class article. Also possibly passes PORNBIO#3 per Sammy1339's analysis.
639:
piece is just standard website clickbait, and is so superficial that just about its only biographical content is that, after she retired from porn she started a blog. There's just not enough here to support a BLP.
169:
572:
her "received overwhelming public adulation and huge media coverage" which suggests more coverage is available in native language. This article alone is a solid claim of notability for the subject IMO.
357:
is a RS or sufficient to pass GNG. It has no by-line and doesn't look like a proper RS. In fact, the site runs on wordpress and is licensed under t CC-SA 3.0 which almost certainly means its a personal
242:
354:
122:
588:. This isn't the sort of article where notability is based on a single potentially reliable source, when that source makes claims that should be easy to corroborate -- but aren't.
666:
and they go back even older, but the older you go less things you'll find. Eg. searching for a very common word such as "actress" in a
January 2003-January 2004 period,
163:
695:'s summary is correct, it says more than the blog thing. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree this time (while I think both of us agree it's a borderline case).
347:
Can you tell us what the hinews.cn article is about and how the source meets RS? Its in
Mandarin, were you able to read it before citing it authoritatively as an RS?
389:'s successor." Then there's some praise of her acting skill. It concludes by mentioning that she became a professional writer after her retirement from pornography.
259:
279:
381:
The hinews source says that she was active in the industry from 1997 to 2004 and that she starred in some classic Hong Kong
Category III (mainstream) films. (
611:
to publicly welcome the actress' visit and to declare her presence could boost tourism on his region, I see some notability here. And on the other hand,
683:
matches for both the words. I am not saying I am nearly certain these newspapers covered the actress back in 2003, but I am reasonably certain the
129:
276:
654:
Maybe not or maybe yes. Online archives are often incomplete, I know it because I regularly use online archives of news sources like
17:
95:
90:
708:
considered that this is a BLP and that we are expected to retain on evidence of sources not the difficulty of finding old ones.
631:
has online archives going back to the relevant data, and it doesn't turn up any result for the article subject's name. Same for
645:
593:
555:
99:
184:
488:, and the sources in the article and posted here appear to be tabloid pieces, not in-depth coverage, thus also fails GNG.
82:
452:
421:
333:
source cited in the article. The article is well-referenced to sources such as JMDB for information about filmography. --
151:
743:
40:
604:
607:"whether there is a change in social values about sex". Except Ozawa's agent is so powerful to force then Magistrate
641:
589:
551:
392:
JMDB is perfectly fine for basic filmography information. I wasn't claiming it should count toward notability.
145:
584:
But where is there any other evidence of that "huge media coverage"? I don't even see any other coverage in
141:
739:
712:
702:
649:
622:
597:
579:
559:
533:
497:
474:
443:
408:
368:
342:
315:
291:
268:
264:
251:
247:
233:
222:
204:
64:
36:
86:
692:
506:
485:
400:
382:
334:
327:
191:
662:
404:
364:
So, in summary, one possible source and that's it unless you can explain the hinews.cn one better.
338:
218:
177:
78:
70:
656:
462:
431:
361:
Taipai Times is already there and might be one source but you need multiple sources to pass GNG
615:
is fine in explaining why she is not just a random adult actress but one of the notable ones.
493:
324:
287:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
738:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
541:. a much closer case than usual, but ultimately the RS coverage just isn't sufficient. The
157:
522:
385:#3 may apply.) It also has some cruft about her appearance and demeanor, and calls her "
696:
668:
628:
616:
573:
527:
303:
214:
55:
467:
436:
550:
piece seem to have panned out, I don't think the case for notability has been made.
350:
JMDB isn't a RS and it damages your assessment of the sourcing to assert that it is.
709:
684:
608:
517:
511:
489:
365:
283:
230:
201:
116:
675:
632:
386:
509:. While most of the current references appear to be primary sources, both
679:
is apparently even worst, over the same period of time it gives exactly
213:
Notable, famous, popular, historical figure in that
Japanese industry...
687:
piece is not deceptive when writing about Ozawa's media impact. About
732:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
455:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
424:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
603:
coverage..." to the point of questioning a professor at the
243:
list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions
112:
108:
104:
176:
461:
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
430:
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
190:
323:. Passes GNG with the following Chinese sources:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
746:). No further edits should be made to this page.
546:the supposed next career steps mentioned in the
8:
258:Note: This debate has been included in the
241:Note: This debate has been included in the
260:list of Japan-related deletion discussions
257:
240:
275:Note: This debate has been added to the
642:The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo)
590:The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo)
552:The Big Bad Wolfowitz (aka Hullaballoo)
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
200:Appears to fail pornbio and gng
713:08:18, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
703:05:09, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
650:22:54, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
623:19:22, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
598:18:45, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
580:17:41, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
560:16:50, 11 September 2015 (UTC)
534:19:44, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
65:09:32, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
1:
498:14:11, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
475:20:14, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
302:- Fails PORNBIO & GNG. –
605:National Central University
444:06:12, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
409:13:10, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
369:06:46, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
343:22:36, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
316:04:57, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
292:12:42, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
269:09:20, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
252:09:20, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
234:05:54, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
223:22:43, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
205:21:29, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
763:
523:reliable secondary sources
735:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
277:WikiProject Pornography
229:And reliable sources?
355:this from Japan Sugoi
395:You are right about
663:Corriere della Sera
353:Please tell me how
477:
446:
329:, as well as the
280:list of deletions
271:
254:
63:
754:
737:
691:, if the above
472:
465:
460:
458:
456:
441:
434:
429:
427:
425:
399:. My mistake. --
313:
308:
294:
267:
250:
195:
194:
180:
132:
120:
102:
62:
60:
53:
34:
762:
761:
757:
756:
755:
753:
752:
751:
750:
744:deletion review
733:
478:
468:
463:
451:
449:
447:
437:
432:
420:
418:
309:
304:
274:
263:
246:
137:
128:
93:
77:
74:
56:
54:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
760:
758:
749:
748:
728:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
719:
718:
717:
716:
715:
669:The China Post
629:The China Post
563:
562:
536:
500:
459:
448:
428:
417:
416:
415:
414:
413:
412:
411:
393:
390:
374:
373:
372:
371:
362:
359:
351:
348:
318:
296:
295:
272:
255:
237:
236:
226:
225:
198:
197:
134:
73:
68:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
759:
747:
745:
741:
736:
730:
729:
714:
711:
706:
705:
704:
701:
699:
694:
690:
686:
682:
678:
677:
671:
670:
665:
664:
659:
658:
653:
652:
651:
647:
643:
638:
634:
630:
627:"Maybe" not.
626:
625:
624:
621:
619:
614:
610:
606:
601:
600:
599:
595:
591:
587:
583:
582:
581:
578:
576:
570:
567:
566:
565:
564:
561:
557:
553:
549:
544:
540:
537:
535:
532:
530:
524:
520:
519:
514:
513:
508:
504:
501:
499:
495:
491:
487:
483:
480:
479:
476:
473:
471:
466:
457:
454:
445:
442:
440:
435:
426:
423:
410:
406:
402:
398:
394:
391:
388:
384:
380:
379:
378:
377:
376:
375:
370:
367:
363:
360:
356:
352:
349:
346:
345:
344:
340:
336:
332:
328:
325:
322:
319:
317:
314:
312:
307:
301:
298:
297:
293:
289:
285:
281:
278:
273:
270:
266:
265:North America
261:
256:
253:
249:
248:North America
244:
239:
238:
235:
232:
228:
227:
224:
220:
216:
212:
209:
208:
207:
206:
203:
193:
189:
186:
183:
179:
175:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
143:
140:
139:Find sources:
135:
131:
127:
124:
118:
114:
110:
106:
101:
97:
92:
88:
84:
80:
76:
75:
72:
69:
67:
66:
61:
59:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
734:
731:
697:
689:Hainan Daily
688:
685:Taipei Times
680:
674:
667:
661:
655:
637:Hainan Daily
636:
617:
613:Hainan Daily
612:
609:Lee Chu-feng
586:Taipei Times
585:
574:
569:Taipei Times
568:
548:Taipei Times
547:
543:Taipei Times
542:
538:
528:
518:Taipei Times
516:
512:Hainan Daily
510:
502:
481:
469:
450:
438:
419:
396:
330:
320:
310:
305:
299:
210:
199:
187:
181:
173:
166:
160:
154:
148:
138:
125:
79:Madoka Ozawa
71:Madoka Ozawa
57:
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
676:Taiwan News
633:Taiwan News
397:Japan Sugoi
331:Japan Sugoi
211:Strong Keep
164:free images
486:WP:PORNBIO
383:WP:PORNBIO
58:Sandstein
740:talk page
693:Sammy1339
507:Sammy1339
401:Sammy1339
387:Ai Iijima
335:Sammy1339
284:• Gene93k
215:Modernist
37:talk page
742:or in a
700:avarrone
620:avarrone
577:avarrone
531:avarrone
470:JAaron95
453:Relisted
439:JAaron95
422:Relisted
358:website.
123:View log
39:or in a
710:Spartaz
657:Variety
490:Kraxler
366:Spartaz
231:Spartaz
202:Spartaz
170:WP refs
158:scholar
96:protect
91:history
635:. The
539:Delete
484:fails
482:Delete
300:Delete
142:Google
100:delete
306:Davey
185:JSTOR
146:books
130:Stats
117:views
109:watch
105:links
16:<
646:talk
594:talk
556:talk
521:are
515:and
505:per
503:Keep
494:talk
405:talk
339:talk
321:Keep
311:2010
288:talk
219:talk
178:FENS
152:news
113:logs
87:talk
83:edit
660:or
192:TWL
121:– (
52:.
648:)
596:)
558:)
496:)
407:)
341:)
326:,
290:)
282:.
262:.
245:.
221:)
172:)
115:|
111:|
107:|
103:|
98:|
94:|
89:|
85:|
698:C
681:0
644:(
618:C
592:(
575:C
554:(
529:C
492:(
464:☮
433:☮
403:(
337:(
286:(
217:(
196:)
188:·
182:·
174:·
167:·
161:·
155:·
149:·
144:(
136:(
133:)
126:·
119:)
81:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.