Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/.hack//GnU

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. (aeropagitica) 23:19, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] .hack//GnU

WP:OR, WP:NN. UnixV 08:27, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, not notable. Gazpacho 08:53, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete — 381 hits on Google doesn't really make it that notable Deon555^talk_Review 09:59, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom --Mecanismo | Talk 11:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete not notable. Any relevent info can be placed in the .hack article. Thε Halo ^Θ 14:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per all of the above - Blood red sandman 14:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I just did some quick googling and it doesn't seem this is a fan comic: so its probably an official comic of the long-running .hack franchise. This alone makes it notable. If anyone has any information to suggest otherwise, please post it, because obviously I don't have much information on this subject. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 17:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete It does seem to be an official part of the .hack franchise (see here, here, and assorted other places not meeting WP:RS), but I can't seem to find anything that does meet WP:RS, and the Google results are unimpressive (3,030 total, many of which are about GNU software rather than this) - makomk 18:56, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

• Comment. To me it sounds like this is a case of "all the good sources are probably in Japanese," a very common occurance. Personally, if reliable sources can't be found, I'd support stubbing this article off (as obviously there are reliable sources for basic information such as the author and name of the manga). However, deleting the article would be silly, as at least some information can be sourced. — Dark Shikari ^talk/_contribs 21:40, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Bigtop 02:48, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Any part of .hack is likely notable enough to be in a list or something. Merging, redirecting, etc do not require deletion. Kotepho 21:11, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete First of all, what can be verified, other then the scanlation group? This article doesn't cite anything and Google is only giving two hits, neither of which I would call solid. And to counter Shikari's argument, Google does include foreign language websites. And previous .hack titles have always been romanized instead of using kanji, so they should turn up in even a simple Google search. --TheFarix (Talk) 02:01, 30 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Ok, I did a Japanese language search, but it still doesn't look promising. Almost all of the hits appear to be from forums, blogs, or other forms of message boards. I can't even find anything on the official .hack website. --TheFarix (Talk) 02:20, 30 August 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.