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 keep. The article has been improved since the nom, now it is much better Tone 21:20, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions. —Viriditas (talk) 01:24, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —Viriditas (talk) 01:28, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hiro Muramoto (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)

Textbook WP:NOT#NEWS and WP:WI1E violation. The subject was not a notable journalist. --DAJF (talk) 11:04, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Significant, independent, reliable coverage is being generated on this individual at the moment due to the recent event. Given this volume, it's very likely that this article will meet any verifiability guidelines. It seems it already does. —siroχo 12:34, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete- We can't speculate that the subject would continue to generate coverage. He is non-notable for now, because Wikipedia is not a news site. If after the events, he still has significant coverage, we could revisit. But for now, this is a "strong delete". RaaGgio (talk) 21:33, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • That isn't correct at all. We don't need to speculate about anything. The subject is already dead, and the event is over. News organizations, journalists and journalism socieites will continue covering the event, and the footage shot by Muramoto is already part of the historical record. He's notable as a cameraman who worked for Reuters covering the Thai protests, and his footage is important to the historical record. It's as far from "non-notable" as you can get on the spectrum of notability. Viriditas (talk) 01:30, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Reuters, and other news agencies, will have many journalists and photographers covering events just as important as the Thailand protests. Would you support an article for all of them too? You note that his footage is part of the "historical record", but that's insufficient according to Wikipedia guidelines. Check the notability guidelines for creative professionals. If Muramoto and his work become a significant monument, like for instance Daniel Pearl, then he might deserve an article. At the moment he doesn't - when you say "the event is over", it sums things up. Currently Muramoto's body of work doesn't pass notability guidelines, and so his death is the only thing he is "notable" for. Which fails him on notable for one event grounds. EJBH (talk) 02:00, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • See below: He's already notable for filming the footage for two viral videos (Kayabukiya Tavern monkey waiters and Loveplus marriage) and footage for the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake. So yes, his body of work does pass notability guidelines, and his current work on the Thai protests has reached an historic level of exposure. That's four notable events, not one. Viriditas (talk) 02:10, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • My taking on that is that, after his death, those paying tribute to him documented his career. This is true of anyone who dies, notable or not - tributes will remember the deceased's life and career. If there are contemporary sources documenting the importance of his work - rather than just obituaries - I'll acknowledge the notability of the work. (Also, it might help to reference the career section). EJBH (talk) 00:27, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, for exactly the reasons specified. Being killed doesn't give him or anyone else notability. EJBH (talk) 15:28, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Sad to say, but its a topical event that will be forgotten in a few days time. No notability here. FellGleaming (talk) 00:28, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep. Cameraman who worked at Reuters in Tokyo for 15 years whose death may have provided evidence related to the ongoing 2010 Thai political protests, specifically the violence of April 10. Contrary to what is claimed above, neither himself or his footage will be forgotten anytime soon, and it is speculated by official sources that Muramoto was the victim of neither red shirt protesters or government soldiers, but unknown gunmen associated with another group, and this footage was captured by other sources. Regret over his death was expressed by Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and Muramoto was recognized by Reuters for his work on the 2004 Indian Ocean earthquake. Rodney Joyce at Reuters has just announced that Muramoto was also the cameraman for two popular viral videos, the Kayabukiya Tavern monkey waiter video and the Loveplus marriage video between Nene Anegasaki and "SAL9000".[1] Viriditas (talk) 02:02, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete When something else notable arises, perhaps as alluded to by Viriditas, then let's have an article. So far, I see no reason to use a Wikipedia article as an obituary. Taquito1 (talk) 01:20, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• 'Strong keep'There is a good chance that someone will expand this article. There should be an expand template, not an impatient "speedy deletion" template. This man's life's work has yet to have a chance to be illuminated and Japanese entries on the English Wikipedia site deserve extra time. Look at Kurt Schork's page! It's a stub, but there's no stub or expand template! Why the exception for an American that died in 2000 who's career still hasn't proven all that important by 2010??? - Also, most of the votes to delete come from people that don't even have user pages.Paradise coyote (talk) 02:22, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes. I don't tend to use Wikipedia as a social networking site. I, you know, edit things and stuff. Apologies if that makes my opinion less valid. EJBH (talk) 00:29, 14 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keepandycjp (talk) 10:07, 13 April 2010 (UTC) RIP[reply]
• Keep Refs have been added. Lugnuts (talk) 17:29, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Muramoto's bio article is now cited and expanded, with additional sources/readings listed on the bottom which can be used to expand again in the future. Another user has also archived the articles. Scanlan (talk) 15:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per those above. Changes since nomination seem to have dramatically improved sourcing. Regards, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 20:59, 19 April 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.