Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kaiho Tsunechika

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 of the debate was keep, no consensus. SushiGeek 08:05, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kaiho Tsunechika

article makes no assertion of notability. If there were an article on every retainer had by every noble in history, wikipedia would explode ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 02:10, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Keep I'd say he's notable. A Clown in the Dark 02:14, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per WP:V. The article cites no sources and Google returns no hits for the name. I assume that he's a real historical figure, and not made up, but as it stands I have no way of verifying that. --Hyperbole 02:17, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge into Kaiho Tsunachika and delete the incorrectly spelled page. Nice work, Haeleth. --Hyperbole 19:47, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - google hits in English for Japanese figure will be low. Even more so for someone dead 400 years.ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 02:51, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment - if someone is notable in Japan, put him in the Japanese Wikipedia; the English one should only include people notable to English speakers. - Runcorn 21:58, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment - You have got to be kidding me. Do you really mean to imply that any notable figure outside the standard mainstream of study in the English-speaking countries should not be mentioned in the English Wikipedia? So, if Japanese feudal lords are not notable enough for you, where do you draw the line? What about obscure Pharoah's advisors? What about the nobility or royalty of the Baltic states? Just because something is obscure to your personal point of view doesn't make it non-notable. LordAmeth 01:22, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment WP:V aside, WP:BIO states for deceased figures "Has the person made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in the specific field?" ⇒ SWATJester Ready Aim Fire! 02:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I don't think this passes WP:BIO, and it definitely doesn't pass WP:V. Even if the person in question was Japanese and died centuries ago, not a single Google hit shows reason for deletion: either the info on the Wiki article is wrong, or it is a hoax, or he was non-notable. But in any case, it's still unverifiable, and that's grounds enough for deletion. -- Kicking222 03:27, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as per Hyperbole and Kicking222. -- Kjkolb 08:13, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as non-notable. A search for the hiragana versions of the names do not turn up any results in Google, suggesting lack of notability. (The same goes for the other similar bios that this user has created). Tangotango 08:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as nn. Eusebeus 11:36, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak keep after correction. This article appears to be about Kaiho Tsunachika: he has a Japanese Wikipedia article, ja:海北綱親. It's debatable whether he's notable enough to be worth mentioning in the English Wikipedia, but he's easily verifiable once one sees past the spelling error in his name.  :) — Haeleth Talk 14:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
    • How amusing: it turns out that we already have an article on Tsunachika already, written by the same editor, containing much the same information. Make that a merge, then, since I am pretty confident they are both about the same person: Tsunechika seems to have been created by a typo in the author's uncited source for the article, here (note the entry that follows for his son, which gets the father's name right). — Haeleth Talk 14:31, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge per Haeleth; good job. Taking into account WP:BIAS, I think he's notable enough, as notable as some of the minor nineteenth century politicians that fill my 1956 Encyclopedia Americana. Coverage of obscure subjects will be as deep as the energy and interest of the contributors. Smerdis of Tlön 14:56, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge as suggested, notable topic but spelled incorrectly. --AlexWCovington (talk) 20:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge the two spellings, then keep or merge the result with Asai Nagamasa. Whether or not he's noteworthy enough for an article, the information belongs in Wikipedia, either in his own article or in his lord's. The article does assert notability with the word "senior." Fg2 01:22, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep and merge. If we know his name, if he's mentioned in the history books, then he's notable enough for me. Maybe with a little research we might even discover if he fought in any major battles or was involved in other major events. LordAmeth 10:36, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep > Merge --User:ElectricEye (talk) 13:56, 22 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep > Merge Startup account 23:23, 25 April 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.