The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.

The outcome of this request for deletion was to  Keep. No consensus. Mh7kJ (talk) 20:02, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ryo Nishikido (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete)

Creol has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: As QD was denied, RfD as A2, and a4.

A2: The article contains absolutely no text outside of the infobox -> a collection of links. A4: While the subject seems notable, there is no claim given nothing is said about the subject outside of the template with the exception of a ref tag without a reflist claiming the Japanese wikipedia as the articles sole reference.

There is no information in this article to be kept or improved on. Sole content is a single infobox. --Creol(talk) 16:01, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.

• Keep. Based on the enwiki article, he appears notable. I've added some info from enwiki, and more can be added. --Auntof6 (talk) 19:23, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  He is clearly notable as stated in the reasoning for the RfD so his notability has essentially no bearing on the RfD. (the article is not being rfd'd for him not being notable but because there is no information given about the subject). As information has been added, I am curious if the information that was added will get wikified properly, the incorrectly linked added info will get fixed and the false and incorrect information which was already included in the infobox will be corrected as well as the infobox itself getting fixed? And then we need someone to go back and reference the entire thing as it is an unreferenced BLP.. It is a lot of work to keep a near orphan article which even the creator barely wrote anything about and almost every parameter in the infobox is not even true. (they did get the birth date correct and he is a singe-songwriter - everything thing else is suspect and needs referenced as it looks to be wrong) --Creol(talk) 17:04, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't mind leaving these class-project pages until they're finished with them, probably by the weekend as according to ELTted that's when school finishes for the term. There are quite a few of them that could probably be redirected or even deleted, but it can wait for a few days. Osiris (talk) 00:34, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep As there is an article on many other wikis I think that the article is notable. Reception123/Receptie123 (talk) 05:34, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  The article is clearly not notable as there are no reliable secondary sources about this article. The person is a bit more questionable as the infobox - the only info on the page during the QD and the start of this RfD aside from a bold text and a reference to Ja.wikipedia - as about an actress/singer who was signed to Sony, Aritra and RCA and associated with Sum 41. The man with this name is neither a woman, signed with any of those labels nor has a connection to Sum 41. Date of birth is the only thing the woman originally at this name had in common with the man this article is now about. He is notable (She would likely be more notable if she ever existed). This has been mentioned multiple times already here but this still has no bearing on why this was brought to Rfd. The notability of the most notable person in the world means nothing when the article has no accurate information on the subject. The present information, in need of cleanup, wikifying, simplification and re-referencing, was added later to try and save a non-existent article which as part hoax and part test page. We have 4 editors putting in time to create an article around an infobox with false information.--Creol(talk) 17:56, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• I've fixed the referencing, and had a go at simplifying. There has been an inordinate amount of time surrounding this; it could have just been deleted as soon as the class project was concluded. However, I think we have ended up with a working article. Osiris (talk) 04:41, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Now keep. ...Aurora... (talk) 10:51, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This request is due to close on 16:01, 1 August 2013 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.