Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wake Up! Aria

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 of the debate was no consensus. Proto///type 14:17, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wake Up! Aria

Delete Just a non-notable hentai. I'd think it would fall into the same category as countless non-notable porno movies. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 20:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• Just hold a minute. I am not through with the page yet! BushinGuy
• Neutral Weak Keep if Kitty Media is notable, this is on the list of their productions translations of hentai. Logic says this debate might be better held about Kitty Media, and then either all their productions go, or all stay. Having looked at several of the other pages in the list at Kitty Media I see this as no more and no less notable than their other films work. The article is much shorter and is really a stub. Fiddle Faddle 21:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Re: above: Even if the company's notable, their individual products may not be. As an example, if we find that Bic is notable, does that perforce mean that each of their pen lines are worthy of solo articles?--Fuhghettaboutit 21:40, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Just because a company is notable doesn't mean all its products are notable. --Coredesat talk 22:50, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Keep per Fiddle Faddle. As notable as any other of Kitty Media's productions. Tevildo 10:58, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment, Kitty Media is only a translator of H-Anime, not the producer. Therefore, I think that argument really shouldn't hold for them. Also, see what Fuhghettaboutit said. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 19:50, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment My error. I will now cross out some more above. I still view the item as a Keep, but in view of reinvestigating to confirm your info I am revising my opinion to "weak". Fiddle Faddle 19:59, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 03:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as notable (it's been commercially published in at least two countries now). Also, I agree with Fiddle Faddle's comments above. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 03:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - I'm for every work of anime that ever existed being in Wikipedia. The fact that the product does not interest YOU does not make it unnoteable. Snarfies 15:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment, now is not the time the Wikipedia is not the place for fanboyism. It isn't notable (not just because I don't care about it, but because there are incredibly' few souls out there who do), and it's hentai or H anime, not plain anime. There are plenty of independent films and pornographic films that have been deleted that are about as notable as this. -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 17:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete (or very very weak merge to parent company article.) Does not assert notability, the article itself is full of fluff "Aria is annoyed by this but is releaved when the wind blows Isogu away." This title was apparently never released on its own in the English market, but bundled with antoher title.

What were the sales? It doesn't matter if it's been published in one or more countries. It doesn't matter if the producer is notable. (Also we should mow down the red-link farm in the parent article.) Second, if the article does stay (and it shouldn't) the article reads like a promotional ad for the video. It mentions nothing of the dissaproving reviews online begging people not to buy the video that was compared to a "mound of elephant droppings " [1] "I must learn my lesson not to expect too much variety from obviously low-budgeted h-anime." [2] --Kunzite 21:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

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.