Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haruka Abe

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. Kurykh (talk) 00:45, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Haruka Abe

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

Abe lacks coverage at the level to pass GNG. She does not have enough significant roles in notable works to be considered a notable actress. John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:58, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:49, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:10, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Provisional Delete Only one of the sources listed is WP:RS, and the search tools yield no dedicated articles from reliable sources. It doesn't looking promising, but an open mind is good User:Montanabw shifted my 'verdict,' but the lack of other reliable sources still inclines me to delete. WP:N. Tapered (talk) 03:51, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article needs work, but though sources are weak, she does have enough credits to meet NACTOR. Montanabw^(talk) 08:31, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I was unsure about this one, but yesterday she was the subject of a detailed profile which is currently featured on the front page of the Japan Times website. That is certainly enough to satisfy GNG. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 23:54, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:N requires multiple dedicated articles. I mentioned that article, but not by name. WP:TOOSOON I think. Tapered (talk) 04:14, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure? This is a new article published after you made your vote and has not yet been used in the wiki article. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:34, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:41, 12 March 2017 (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.