Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crimson Wolf

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. A weak keep, but a keep nonetheless. Certainly no consensus to delete. Rough consensus was that the sources mentioned satisfied GNG. (non-admin closure) Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 18:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Crimson Wolf

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable anime, nothing found in a WP:BEFORE to help it pass WP:NFILM. Tagged for notability since April 2020. Donaldd23 (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Donaldd23 (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The film is covered in The Complete Anime Guide: Japanese Animation Film Directory & Resource Guide. Considering that this came out in 1993 and is in Japanese, it would be good to make a request to look at Japanese-language sources to find further coverage, including in databases of offline sources. There just may not be much English-language or ~~print~~ online coverage. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 17:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Erik, Were you able to check the extent of the coverage in that source? Is it just mentioned in passing, or does it have its own paragraph, section or chapter? And does it go beyond a plot summary / list of actors / etc.? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 13:56, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can't tell. Screenshot here. Erik (talk | contrib) ^{(ping me)} 15:34, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Erik, Huh. Does look like it may have its own entry... but it could be just two line-long. Without knowing if the coverage is non-trivial I will abstain. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 05:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep per Erik. AfDs and PRODs based around the nominator being unfamiliar with the language (or culture) of a subject are an irritant of mine. Of course, not all anime not discussed in English is notable (quite the contrary), but considering the context of this work and its coverage elsewhere, I suspect a multilingual WP:BEFORE is needed. Willing to change my !vote if it pans out there's nothing in Japanese either. Vaticidalprophet (talk) 17:14, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Japanese Wikipedia lists no sources but it's understandable since the film was released pre-Internet and it seems to have been based on a manga. The title Kurenai no ōkami to ashikase no hitsuji (紅の狼と足枷の羊) is also not the correct original title of the work; it's a work by another author that's not related to the subject of the article. I will be editing it. lullabying (talk) 23:09, 17 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 11:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northern Escapee (talk) 05:08, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep. It is listed in an anime encyclopedia, which in theory is a reliable secondary source, but still needs more sources. ✍A.WagnerC (talk) 05:34, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Current sources seems to show enough to pass WP:GNG. Setreis (talk) 08:17, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep per above. Link20XX (talk) 22:44, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.