Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Strait Jacket (novel)

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. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 02:09, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Strait Jacket (novel)

Strait Jacket (novel) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) The article, Strait Jacket doesn't contain that much information, and lacks notability. Nothing444 14:17, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. This article needs more info and references.--RyRy5 talk 16:44, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

• Weak Keep so add them. It's sold more than half a million copies and has a couple of reviews, I think that passes notability guidelines for books. An article not having info/refs is not a reason for delete if they can be found. TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 18:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. —TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 18:52, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
• Speedy Keep - a series with an anime adaption is clearly notable; added links to ANN and official site. Just needs expansion. Doceirias (talk) 19:45, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep: Passes WP:BK 3, for having a dramatic adaptation. (Yes, this is a direct to video release, but the status of such a release is much higher in Japan than in most English-speaking countries -- see the OVA article -- and it is the consensus of WP:ANIME that an anime OVA also counts for this notability clause.) NB: does not quality for speedy keep. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:57, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
• Keep per Quasirandom. An OVA adaptation is indicative of notability. Besides, not containing much information is not a reasonable deletion rationale (it is a surmountable problem). Bikasuishin (talk) 17:24, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• Even more, it's official policy that not having much information is OK. —Quasirandom (talk) 18:17, 24 March 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.