Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Junichi Fujisaku
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus, default to keep. Wizardman 16:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Junichi Fujisaku
Fails WP:BIO. Unnotable director of video games with no significant coverage nor major achievements in the field. Collectonian (talk) 14:46, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. -- Collectonian (talk) 14:48, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete - as a non-notable video game director. Coverage in outside sources is lacking. Tnxman307 (talk) 15:44, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Delete Per WP:BIO. He may be notable in his own field of work, but that field isn't wide enough to ascertain notability per the guideline. PeterSymonds | talk 16:23, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Weak keep. It seems to me that the subject's chief notability is as the director for the Blood+ series rather than the video games. He also appears to have authored 3 light novels based on Ghost in the Shell. While I understand the nomination, I'd argue that the Blood+ connection meets the "significantly involved in the creation of a major work" criterion of WP:BIO as the anime did make it over here and was nationally broadcast on Adult Swim. There is also a live action film in post-production scheduled for released at the end of the year. Xymmax (talk) 16:34, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Any notability of Blood+ does not pass down to him. Collectonian (talk) 18:58, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but what does that have to do with the "significantly involved in the creation of a major work" bit? By that logic there should be no article on George Lucas because the significance of Star Wars and Indiana Jones doesn't pass down to him. 208.245.87.2 (talk) 19:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- He has significance from having significant coverage in a larger number of reliable sources. Having made a contribution in one somewhat notable anime series does not equal his being notable. He doesn't have significant coverage in reliable sources. Collectonian (talk) 19:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Perhaps, but what does that have to do with the "significantly involved in the creation of a major work" bit? By that logic there should be no article on George Lucas because the significance of Star Wars and Indiana Jones doesn't pass down to him. 208.245.87.2 (talk) 19:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —Fg2 (talk) 00:50, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Keep - Since when were directing an anime that aired on US television and writing novels that were translated into English not more than enough notability? Doceirias (talk) 01:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Keep Aren't animation directors or script writers considered "generally notable"? -- Taku (talk) 08:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Merge - As a director himself, he hasn't accomplished much in his career; however, he has directed games sold to the general public. I say merge into the Production IG article due to lack of credible information to support it as a seperate article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.161.86.254 (talk) 19:03, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- There's only one mention of game in the article; he's primarily a screenwriter. Doceirias (talk) 22:28, 8 May 2008 (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.
