Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Yuko Aoki: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 11:51, 20 March 2006 editBookofjude (talk | contribs)5,762 edits []: +keep← Previous edit Revision as of 18:27, 20 March 2006 edit undoJzG (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers155,070 edits []: Weak deleteNext edit →
Line 17: Line 17:
*'''Provisional Keep''', if the kanji explanation noted above is correct (my study of Japanese never went that far). ] 11:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC). *'''Provisional Keep''', if the kanji explanation noted above is correct (my study of Japanese never went that far). ] 11:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC).
*'''Keep'''. Seems notable enough based on a quick google, asides from everyone else's comments (and the nominator's). ]] <small>(],],])</small> 11:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC) *'''Keep'''. Seems notable enough based on a quick google, asides from everyone else's comments (and the nominator's). ]] <small>(],],])</small> 11:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
* '''Weak delete''' since I don't actually think she ahs ever done anything that notable. Any woman with large enough breasts can garner a million Googles easily without ever doing anything of any signifciance whatsoever. Not that I care overmuch, but this really does seem to be breastcruft. I suppose it might justifiably be defended per systemic bias, as balancing some of the millions of utterly non-notable American women with large breasts... ] 18:27, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 18:27, 20 March 2006

Yuko Aoki

Keep page had prod tag, I changed to afd because while the article is very weak, she was actually one of the most popular bikini models in Japan about 10 years ago, then abruptly abandoned her modeling career Nobunaga24 01:31, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

If you enter the kanji for her name (青木裕子) you actually get 500,000 hits Nobunaga24 02:01, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per nom --TBC 02:01, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep, since nominator wants article kept and no delete votes yet. (Nobunaga, it's fine to remove a PROD tag without nominating for AfD. Perhaps you know this and just wanted to make sure this PROD got discussed, but I thought I'd mention it just in case you didn't know.) --Allen 02:03, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • I added to afd because I hate it when people just remove my prod tag, so I won't do it to someone else :). I figure if somebody wants to delete it, it's probably worth debating a bit. Nobunaga24 02:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep. Her picture was everywhere on the internet back in 1997-1998. -- JJay 02:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • speedy keep nothing contested. Niffweed17, Destroyer of Chickens 02:59, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • And what with all this "keep" talk the article as it stands could still be speedily deleted as having no claim to notability. I put a note to that effect on the talk page and {{prod}}-ed it instead of speedily deleting it myself, in fact. Here's a bit of a crazy idea - put some of these references into the article. I'll spare everyone the quotation from wp:v that says that the burden is on whomever wants an article included to provide sources. - brenneman 04:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
    I've also reversed the "speedy keep" closure as testimony of editors isn't a source. Clearly someone *cough* me *cough* thought this was open to debate, as a prod tag had been added, and no actual citations have been provided to indicate notability, just some hand waving and a google search. And while I suppose that there is nothing saying that someone known for their "large breasts" couldn't have gone on to do work in host sphingolipid biosynthesis as a target for hepatitis C virus I suspect that this is in fact a common name and many of these hits are spurious. Can we see some actual sources, please.
    brenneman 05:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
    The closer also un-closed at the same time as me (with no edit conflict?) so sorry that I was a bit narky about the quick close.
    brenneman 05:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
    If you could read Japanese, you would know that if you do a search using kanji, that she was (and still is) incredibly popular in Japan and also outside of Japan. She has several DVDs in Japan, and numerous photobooks. A search on amazon.co.jp will show this. As far as fleshing out this article, a) I only stumbled across it today because it was listed for deletion b) since I do most editing at work, searching bikini model web sites isn't really an option as I would probably get fired. This needs to be expanded, not deleted. Nobunaga24 05:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
    Which is exactly why I used prod instead of speedy deletion, I repeat. All I'm asking for is that rather than closing this as "keep" and leaving the article a micro-stub that someone sometime in the next five days puts some evidence into the actual article. If for no other reason than so that I may bookmark them for, ah, research.
    brenneman 05:48, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
    Now that I know of the existence of this page, when I can get some edit time where I don't run the risk of a sexual harassment suit, believe me, I will dedicate myself to expanding it. I will make the sacrifice of browsing page after page of scantily clad, buxom Japanese models in order to ferret out more information to add to the general repository of knowledge contained in wikipedia. That is if in the process of research I remember to come back to wikipedia. Nobunaga24 06:02, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep --Terence Ong 11:07, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Provisional Keep, if the kanji explanation noted above is correct (my study of Japanese never went that far). Lankiveil 11:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC).
  • Keep. Seems notable enough based on a quick google, asides from everyone else's comments (and the nominator's). Jude (talk,contribs,email) 11:51, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak delete since I don't actually think she ahs ever done anything that notable. Any woman with large enough breasts can garner a million Googles easily without ever doing anything of any signifciance whatsoever. Not that I care overmuch, but this really does seem to be breastcruft. I suppose it might justifiably be defended per systemic bias, as balancing some of the millions of utterly non-notable American women with large breasts... Just zis Guy you know? 18:27, 20 March 2006 (UTC)