This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Joyous (talk) 00:58, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Not encyclopedic, non-notable. A google search turns up lyrics from a song apparently by Youhei Shimizu. No other notable information. P0per 04:33, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- the article as-is is not nearly sufficient in content to explain what is meant by the title of the article, let-alone its significance. --Mysidia 04:42, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, I have no idea what that is supposed to be, but whatever it is, it has vanishingly little context so could almost be speedied as a new user test or something. -Splash 05:03, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cleanup if he's a game-music producer. Else, delete. --Penwhale | Blast the Penwhale 18:17, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, notable game-music producer. Kappa 11:20, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep & Cleanup Just because Bemani is unknown to many people (inluding me BTW) doesn't neccesarily mean it's unnotable or should be deleted. Case of trigger-happy vfd-scouts :) Apparently the guy in question is famous in the genre. It does need some cleanup and pehaps information why he got his own page instead of being just a mention on List of Bemani musicians. Lomedae 12:40, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep jamesgibbon 15:01, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Cleanup. Obscure does not mean not noteworthy, and he does have published works. But the article itself needs a lot of work. Nandesuka 17:39, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: The article doesn't even explain who he is. Why is this a biography? Why isn't this just a name mentioned in the context of an article on the music? Then note that the people who vote keep on all game music still can't be bothered to improve any articles, and we have a situation where even the fans don't want to lift a finger to help out, so it's highly unlikely that this incomprehensible mess will ever get better. Vote on the article, not the topic. Geogre 20:51, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Vfd is not cleanup. Kappa 22:04, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Exactly, and that is why this is a clear delete. Of course, if fans believed in it, they could try to keep it from being such a patent deletion guideline violator. Apparently, though, they're not interested in that. They're only interested in keeping weak stuff, so long as it satisfies their own hobbies. Some of us save articles that should otherwise be deleted. Others just insist that the process not go forward. Geogre 23:07, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • If an article satifies someone's own hobbies, it obviously has some value, and should be kept and left for the wiki process to improve. Unfortunately some people use Vfd to try to force improvement from those who have no special knowledge or interest in the topic, but are doing their best to preserve wikipedia's value against those who would remove almost everything that makes it a useful resource. Kappa 10:02, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, the fact that it satisfies someone's hobby makes it perfect for Everything2.com, but not an encyclopedia. This is particularly true when we start insisting that not only should the favorite tune be covered, but that the author get a "biography" that consists of...the tunes! Then that there be an article about a variation, then another about the co-writer, then the company, etc. All spiralling out because it is the hobbyist's hobby to collect trivia. Hobbies are private entertainments, while encyclopedias are public references. Some people mistake the "anyone can edit" for "centered around You." The fact that anyone can edit doesn't mean that all possible desires and interests are equally appropriate. Geogre 16:56, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • The article wasn't created by me, but it informs me more about who creates music for music games, a topic which I happen to be interested in. So I can't really understand the "private entertainment" concept. If wikipedia isn't here to satisfy people's interests and desires for information, what is it for exactly? Kappa 21:26, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete borderline notable at best. JamesBurns 07:55, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep This "article" is very sub-par, but 1600 Google hits suggests some notability. Xoloz 17:24, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notable and encyclopedic. Google has plenty of hits!!!--GrandCru 03:25, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. VfD is not cleanup. Instead of listing this, why not make a stub about the guy? Grace Note 03:39, 20 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.