Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zombieland Saga

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 no consensus. Sandstein 16:43, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Zombieland Saga (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Article made same day of announcement for anime airing in fall. Perhaps in future (and with refs outside of industry fansites), but seems to me to be a little pre-emptive as well as having only trivial coverage in fansites which seems to fail GNG. Etzedek24 ^{(Would it kill ya to leave an edit summary?)} 03:16, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 03:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk to me 03:36, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Anime News Network is not a "fansite": it's the best English language source for anime and manga-related news and has been running since 1998. As for the deletion, I obviously oppose it, but if the article is deleted, then I would recommend simply trimming it down to a redirect since it will definitely be notable within ~3 months. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 05:13, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. Hhkohh (talk) 06:08, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP: TOOSOON - it might be worth checking the film for notability after the film has been released. Vorbee (talk) 08:52, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or Draftify - Considering it's an original anime, there's really not much info about it yet out other than the announcement. With that said, I'm opposed to it being deleted outright and would rather it be kept (we do keep articles on newly-announced original anime on a regular basis), but if keeping it isn't an option, draftifying would be a better alternative since it will air soon anyway. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:30, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• From above, I would support this being turned into a draft. It just needs more sources to satisfy GNG, which you who are more familiar with anime/manga wiki articles (I'm a fan IRL but not active in that community on here), seem to think will happen with time. Etzedek24 ^{(Would it kill ya to leave an edit summary?)} 14:03, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Are you suggesting that October is far off? I personally would have waited for more information but the current article is fine for the time being. —Xezbeth (talk) 17:31, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's no comments about production, cast, or anything of the sort. It's just simply too soon. Etzedek24 ^{(Would it kill ya to leave an edit summary?)} 17:35, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or Draftify Honestly, we should strongly discourage creating articles based solely on an anime announcement. Editors should allow time for additional reporting that establishments notability before creating such articles. There is also the slim chance that production would be canceled do to unforeseen situations, as we saw happen earlier this year. WP:TOOSOON, WP:CRYSTALBALL, WP:NOTE, and WP:NODEADLINE —Farix (t | c) 21:12, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, you're kind of cherry-picking the content of those essays to suit your own needs. The very second point of WP:NODEADLINE is don't rush to delete articles unless their potential significance cannot be established. As a collaboration between two major and respected companies, I think this anime's significance has definitely been established, nevermind its potential significance. You also cite WP:CRYSTALBALL while simultaneously making a purely speculative comment about it potentially being cancelled, presumably in reference to New Life+: Young Again in Another World and the events surrounding its cancellation, an event which, I would argue, actually served to cement that series' notability. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 01:08, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep or if that doesn't work move it to draft.. This seems to be some notable people producing it, so surely more attention later on. (edited for tone and also to say KEEP) Dream Focus 16:45, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The fact is, this anime will be coming out in only three months. To not have an article on it would be an oversight on the part of Wikipedia: people are going to be coming here looking for information on the subject, especially since it's a collaboration between a notable game developer (Cygames) and a notable and respected animation studio (MAPPA). Yes, the article is short right now, but that's why the stub classification exists: for articles that are currently short but cover something which is both necessary and has the potential to expand. Deleting it would be unnecessary and would only be in service of a misguided devotion to deletionism based on essays (not polices or even guidelines) such as WP:TOOSOON. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 00:42, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Did you look through the custom Google search for anime (edit: can't post a link since it gives me a message its on the blacklist) and see if any of those places mention anything more than a brief mention it was coming out and who made it? Is there any details about it yet? Dream Focus 00:50, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The release date is not too far off for the present stub article to be kept, and expanded as more information becomes available. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 10:01, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The release date is far enough off that they don't have a "release date", they have a "release season". Does WP:NFF apply for a series? StrayBolt (talk) 05:48, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Most anime don't have an exact release date announced until a few weeks from their premiere. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 13:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Is it "Zombieland" or "Zombie Land"? This seems to be the press release. It doesn't show up on MAPPA Coming Soon.StrayBolt (talk) 03:10, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sources refer to it as "Zombieland", so that's what I went with. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 13:14, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced. The (probably) press release has both. Does the sources (only 1 in the article) add anything beyond the press release? The trailer has it broken up. Searching finds for me 88 "Zombie Land Saga" and about 154 "zombieland saga". Also, many of the Japanese pages write it "ZombieLand SAGA", but this might be one bad source being replicated (perhaps reducing the total count). Searching in Japanese finds 104 results. Maybe the split word is a bad auto-translation. Is there any connection with Zombieland? StrayBolt (talk) 17:18, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure MOS:CAPS would forbid the use of the stylization used in Japanese sources, which means it would default to the non-capitalized version (aka, how it is currently titled). G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 22:25, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The official website says "(C) ZOMBIE LAND SAGA PARTNERS", but I know company names don't always match the final title. StrayBolt (talk) 16:14, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: This nom has been referred to as misguided deletionism but WP:CRYSTAL specifically recommends against announcements like this one. If the series had a definite date and a case for notability could be made, then a better argument to keep could be made. Right now, it has no evidence of a definite date, nor any additional sources since the page was nom'd. Etzedek24 ^{(I'll talk at ya) (Check my track record)} 22:38, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nomination. An upcoming TV series? The promotional department plays the music; we're not obliged to dance. No crystal balls here. -The Gnome (talk) 09:51, 14 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Upcoming television series and the many similar categories suggest otherwise. Almost every new television series gets an article before they start airing. —Xezbeth (talk) 12:17, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I should have phrased this better. Here's better: TV and film production is going on round the clock. New films, episodes, series, specials and what-have-you are announced, tested, piloted, teased, and so on, every minute and every hour. To sort out what's Wikinotable and what's not from this avalanche we rely on sources. A mere press release from the Cygames production company does not make the subject notable. Let's just graciously accord this a WP:TOOSOON. I hope this is better. -The Gnome (talk) 06:28, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not to be technical, but that was a news article, not a press release. This was a press release. There's a difference: one is a primary source, the other is a secondary source. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 15:14, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have been admonished (more than warranted) about churnalism and while I don't know enough about the site, that article would qualify. While it does have a byline, it also says, "Source: Press Release" and has no info beyond what is in the PR. They edited the PR down, quoted the superlatives, added links,… basically what is done in WP for articles. StrayBolt (talk) 16:45, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, StrayBolt. Plus ça change, etc. -The Gnome (talk) 06:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Draftify, Merge, & Redirect - One press release/teaser does not an article make. Save the work done somewhere, mention it somewhere to acknowledge it, have a redirect to discourage creating an article until more information is released. I guess the redirect would preserve it so maybe the draft isn't needed. I'm not convinced there is not a space in "Zombie Land" so the title might change.StrayBolt (talk) 16:14, 14 July 2018 (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.