Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Metropolis (Japanese magazine)

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 keep but please cite some references for this article. W.marsh 20:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Metropolis (Japanese magazine)

Metropolis (Japanese magazine) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Patrolling CAT:CSD, this was nominated as a WP:CSD#G11. Based on the conversation on the talk page I thought it was best to bring up to AfD. No Stance —— Eagle (ask me for help) 09:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Keep. English-language magazine with the largest circulation in Japan; hardly non-notable. - Tangotango 12:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
  • English-language...largest circulation in Japan That's not saying a great deal, since it's 30,000 in a metropolitan area of 12 million. I suspect the Japanese Elvis Presley Fan Club newsletter gets higher numbers. --Calton | Talk 01:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The notability does not come from the absolute number of copies, but from the magazine's position as the largest in its (albeit small) market. Your opinion about the Japanese Elvis Presley Fan Club is irrelevant without verification. Sparkzilla 06:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

If you draw the lines tightly enough, you can use any superlative you like, like "the best Jewish deli in Tokyo". Free clue: how crowded IS the giveaway-magazine market in Tokyo? There's the Weekender, and ... well, that's pretty much it. --Calton | Talk 08:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The "best Jewish Deli" is opinion again. Please stick to facts. Sparkzilla 08:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Let's try highlighting the actual point instead of irrelvancies: If you draw the lines tightly enough, you can use any superlative you like. I'm sorry, but am I going have to resort to crayons and butcher paper to make the point simple enough? --Calton | Talk 05:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

You voted "weak keep" so why exactly are you disagreeing with anyone who says "keep"? If you don't think it should be included then at least be consistent, and stop arguing against your own position. Sparkzilla 07:37, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep per Tango. Neier 14:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletions. -- Neier 14:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. I am the primary author of the article. Metropolis, as the English magazine in Japan with the largest independently verified circulation, is clearly notable. If this is categorized as spam then Time Out, Village Voice and L.A. Weekly should also be deleted. Sparkzilla 14:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• Read WP:INN before you say that. But, in any case, some numbers
• Metropolis circulation: 30,000
• Village Voice circulation: 260,000

• (Also, three Pulitzer Prizes, and publisher of Alexander Cockburn, Michael Musto, Sydney H. Schanberg, Jules Feiffer)

• LA Weekly circulation: 215,000

• (Also, a few awards)

• Time Out New York circulation: 128,000 (paid)
• Time Out London circulation: 86,000 (paid)

• (also, 48 travel guides with their names on it)

• Metropolis is not in the same league. Hell, it's barely in the same business. --Calton | Talk 01:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

To clarify, I was not comparing circulations but pointing out that the Metropolis page follows a similar format to the other magazines, which are not classified as spam. Sparkzilla 03:34, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

You mean they also use sentences, with verbs, nouns, objects, and adjectives? Because that's about the only similarity I see. Once again, read WP:INN, as the phrase "apples and oranges" come immediately to mind. --Calton | Talk 08:24, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Please read what I actually said. To clarify again: Metropolis's Wikipedia page follows a similar format to the Wikipedia pages for the other magazines. If the complaint is that the Metropolis page is spam then the pages for other city magazines are also spam, as it could be said that they also include "promotional" content. In other words, should pages about products be deleted because describing a product (even with verifiable data) also promotes it? Sparkzilla 08:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I read what you actually said, and it's still actually bogus. Hint: format is irrelevant, subject is. --Calton | Talk 05:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, Metropolis seems to be one of the most well-known English magazines around in Japan. Definitely notable and warrants a keep. It needs lots of cleanup, with a total rewrite in a more encyclopedic and professional tone. Terence Ong 16:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

• one of the most well-known English magazines A medium-sized fish in a very small pond. --Calton | Talk 01:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, wow glad you guys are all looking at to why this is coming under AfD, not for it being non-notable but under WP:CSD#G11. See the article no inline citations, it just one big ad; I'd love to see it back on wikipedia but as an encyclopedic article not an advertisement. --Simonkoldyk 17:26, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep; I'm sure Eagle 101 is acting in good faith, but this should not be on AfD. This is not "blatant advertising" by any standards. It does lack third-party sources, but that is best handled by requesting them in the first instance; and the repeated removal of requests for sources is likewise best handled by using a third opinion, or some other legitimate dispute resolution process, not by edit-warring or by (I find this incredible) actually tagging a page for speedy deletion! — Haeleth Talk 18:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Make no mistake, it's a very crappy magazine kept afloat by gaijin bar ads and worth every penny you pay for it, namely nothing. But it (barely) clears the bar of notability, in that a fair number of expats here read the damned thing, only for the movie listings and the aforementioned bar ads. --Calton | Talk 01:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - As above. Metropolis is a very notable magazine. However, the article does need to be fixed. MightyAtom 01:54, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Some strange new meaning of "very notable" I was previously unaware of. From where does this notability spring? Not from leaving giveaway stacks of copies at their advertisers' locations, surely. --Calton | Talk 05:35, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

• keep please it is a well known magazine and should not be erased Yuckfoo 04:41, 7 December 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.