Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gogyōshi (2nd nomination)

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 delete. TomStar81 (Talk) 11:12, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gogyōshi

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

Article survived a previous AfD discussion with no consensus, but no one seriously arguing in favour of a keep. The term is a neologism in both Japanese and English, and in Japanese appears to be just a generic term for any 5-line poem (that's what it literally means). The only source that wasn't previously rejected, that attests to the usage of the term in English is apparently the self-published (via Lulu) publication Atlas Poetica, which also came up in the recent Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tanka prose and was established as an unreliable source. elvenscout742 (talk) 06:12, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A Google search also brought up only 1,770 hits, which excluding Wikipedia and mirror sites consisted almost entirely of blogs and online dictionaries. elvenscout742 (talk) 06:16, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further Comment Regarding the comments made in the article's defense in the previous discussion: Internet searches should use quotation marks if they are to be used in establishing the notability of certain terms, especially Japanese ones. Searching for 五行詩 (no quotation marks) does indeed bring up over a million results, but they are almost all results that happen to include the characters 五, 行 and 詩 somewhere in the article. A quotation marked search for the Japanese term yielded only 51,000 results, again mostly user-generated content. Also, again, the fact that Japanese has a special word denoting any five-line poem doesn't mean anything for English Wikipedia -- it is not a unique genre of poetry that is separate from, say, tanka or limerick (poetry). If you like, please add the term to Wiktionary. The comment Japanese people don't use a quotation mark generally seems to indicate an ignorance of the way internet search engines work. I graduated first-class honours majoring in Japanese, and I have level N1 on the JLPT: I know Japanese don't often use quotation marks, but in internet searches they have a technical function. Wikipedia also is not a crystal ball, so the comment that we can expect the development of "Gogyohshi" in the future is irrelevant. The existence in the English-speaking world of some people (writing blogs and self-published articles) who misunderstand the word and think it is a unique genre rather than just a Japanese word for any five-line poem (possibly redirect to Quintain (poetry)?) does not prove notability. elvenscout742 (talk) 02:13, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The comment here is also flawed in its rejection of quotation marks. A search for "会津太郎" with quotation marks brought up not 1,800,000 results but 23,100. 会津 and 太郎 are both fairly common names, and one of the hits on the first page was a Youtube clip about a sweet-shop named Tarōio in Aizu. So I searched for "会津太郎" 五行詩 (romanized, "Aizu Tarō" Gogyōshi) and got 757 results. The top result was the Japanese Wikipedia article on this person, created and mostly edited solely by User:Rappelle toi. I am not sure about Japanese Wikipedia's notability guidelines, but I intend to do some research and probably post that article for deletion, if Japanese Wikipedia is anywhere near as strict as English on this issue, since there seem to be some serious WP:VANITY issues (or at least WP:OR issues) involved here. elvenscout742 (talk) 02:30, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This looks like something made up. There are not enough reliable sources for notability. 1.112.77.29 (talk) 07:29, 22 October 2012 (UTC)— 1.112.77.29 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note, the above SPA account appear to have as main purpose voting delete in almost all the Japan-related AfDs. Cavarrone (talk) 08:46, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:RECENTISM. 2011? That's far too recent for the development and establishment of a new literary form. Qworty (talk) 08:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The editor who created the article is apparently engaged in a one-man publicity campaign for Mr. Aizu, and created this article almost immediately on the "form" being "created". elvenscout742 (talk) 07:06, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Notability is absent. Gbooks finds nothing. Gwebsearch results are confined to user-generated matter (Google Groups etc). Gogyōshi is a breakaway form of gogyōka, itself deleted earlier this year at this AfD. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 08:37, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A breakaway genre of a genre which itself does not have an article is probably not notable enough to have its own article. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:30, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The AfD has been running since October 17, about two weeks. It should be time to close this. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:30, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. With no one speaking in this article's defense and several users presenting arguments in favour of deletion, this AfD's result should have been obvious, but it has apparently long-since disappeared from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old/Open AfDs. Can the administrators even find it now? elvenscout742 (talk) 07:37, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.