Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yuima Nakazato

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 draftify‎. ✗plicit 00:10, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yuima Nakazato

[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)

Seems to be questionable with meeting WP:GNG criteria. Reads like an advertisement. Most sources are a mere trivial mention of the subject of the article and some are just selling things or are promoting him. Seawolf35 (talk) 22:34, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete. Passes G11 of speedy deletion criteria, but there are sources out there. If found to be reliable, I might change my vote. Brachy08 _(Talk) 03:12, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Fashion, and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 09:40, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Coverage here in French [1], here in a HK newspaper [2] and this also in French, but not a strong a source [3]. Also was featured in an NHK item [4]. Oaktree b (talk) 15:09, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify and revert to this old version. Current version is WP:PROMO for a brand. The article is primarily focused mostly around a brand named after the subject, and would need to meet CORP even if it was not promotional.

Looking at the article history, it looks like it was created by an account as an imperfect draft stub, still slightly promotional but not as bad [5] and submitted to AFC. It was declined for notability reasons. As a BIO, Oaktree's sources may help with that (but not as CORP).

At a later time a different editor (possible SPA) turned it into this promotional piece [6] and moved it out of draft. —siro χ o 19:06, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It's not just the typical aroma of advertising that's fouling up the text, it's the lack of significant, acceptable sources supporting notability, a lack buried under an overkill of lame irrelevancies. It only takes a few minutes of forensic work to confront it. To wit:

A local website listing rather indiscriminately local people, as it does here with our subject; a state organ promoting "Japanese talent", in general, as in here; some article about a group of designers among whom our subject is mentioned; this report on "Juniors Fashion Week", in which, again, our subject's name surfaces once; the commercial listing of our subject's photography book posted upon its publication; another commercial listing, this one by a "textile & sewing producer"; Fédération de la Haute Couture et de la Mode is a prestigious institution but its use as a source has no merit, being a simple listing of our subject; more brochures - this one's about a dance event, which does not even mention our subject, and neither does this about an opera; at least, this report about a ballet mentions Nakazato once, as many times as the Japan Times yearly round-up; another prestigiuous institution's website, the Barbican's, is scared up, yet it's only one more exhibition catalog; and so on, and so forth. Then we descend to the level of primary sources such as the brochure for "Fashion Frontier Program" written by Nakazato who's also the creator and owner of FFP.

I'd sincerely wish a possible future entry in Wikipedia, but, for the moment, we have very little for that. -The Gnome (talk) 14:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:42, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NCORP and as such the article as written is not suitable for main space. Draftify is also an acceptable outcome. The sources found by OaktreeB do indicate that an article on the person could pass GNG; although an article on the company would not. This article could be re-tooled into a biography page that passes W:GNG. However, we should require that the draft pass an WP:AFC review to make sure it has been suitably modified.4meter4 (talk) 15:40, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:33, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As nom, it fails WP:NCORP as of the moment and kind of needs a WP:TNT to have a future entry.(If this is considered vote stacking please discount this opinion and strike this vote) Seawolf35 (talk) 14:14, 5 October 2023 (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.