Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zoom In: Rape Apartments
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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The result was Withdrawn. Joe Chill (talk) 23:10, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Zoom In: Rape Apartments (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I can't find significant coverage for this film. Joe Chill (talk) 18:12, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy Keep 30-year-old Japanese film released by Nikkatsu, the oldest film studio in the country. Coverage in media would have been significant, but difficult to find due to lack of Japanese sourcing on the Internet. The significance of the film is already shown in the article, as is significant coverage in the Weisser book. Dekkappai (talk) 18:41, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The Allmovie entry (http://www.allmovie.com/work/245106) seems to have been expanded since I last worked on the article. It verifies some of the text in the article, also claiming it is "one of the Nikkatsu studio's most unusual pinku eiga films." Dekkappai (talk) 18:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment2 I might also point out that the film has an entry in a book called Japanese Cinema Encyclopedia. When an online project purporting to be an encyclopedia covering "the sum of human knowledge" deems a subject of a paper encyclopedia article to be outside its area of coverage, then something has gone very wrong somewhere. Dekkappai (talk) 19:20, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The sources identified by Dekkappai establish notability. --Mkativerata (talk) 22:17, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep with respects to the nominator, not all pre-internet subjects have wide coverage on the web. That topic is covered in books[1] and other online sources that will require translation[2]. A reasonable presumption of notability in Japanese is acceptable for en.Wikipedia. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:24, 1 May 2010 (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.