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. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 08:58, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of mergers in Kagoshima Prefecture[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This list of municipal government mergers does not pass WP:LISTN, as I could find no sources discussing these mergers as a group, and as none of the mergers have pages individually it also does not pass WP:SALAT as it serves no navigational purpose. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:57, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics, Geography, and Japan. Devonian Wombat (talk) 22:57, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Procedural comment There are 47 pages in Category:Lists of mergers in Japan for each of the prefectures, and I would recommend against deleting just one. The main article discussing the mergers as a group is Municipal mergers and dissolutions in Japan, and it seems appropriate to split instances of this by prefecture. The Japanese wikipedia has similar lists (though more comprehensive) at ja:Template:都道府県別廃止市町村, with a longer main article at ja:日本の市町村の廃置分合. Maybe mergers or even deletion would be appropriate here, but they should probably be discussed as a group. Reywas92^Talk 23:38, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep mostly on procedural grounds. There are lots of references on the Japanese version of the page, making me think that it's a valid informational list that would be found per LISTN. SALAT does not require a navigational purpose, and the scope is sufficiently limited. SportingFlyer T·C 17:55, 10 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: it is unbelievable to propose this topic is not discussed in Japanese language sources (newspapers, urban/muninicial planning journals). Article also serves a clear navigation purpose and passes per WP:CLN. It seems this could be an important a piece in a local history SUMMARYSTYLE article structure, it would be odd to delete this piece. // Timothy :: talk 19:23, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:11, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - This is the purest form of WP:IINFO. Absolutely nothing gives this data context. Above there is reference to links on the Japanese version of this page, but this is entirely links to the official Japanese Gazette, which of course lists every official event (e.g., promotions, deaths, awards etc.) in tiny one-sentence mentions - this is neither significant coverage nor from a source that exercises any discrimination at all in what it reports. These links are easily reviewed in machine translation. Here's an example:

"Pursuant to the provisions of Article 7, Paragraph 1 of the Local Autonomy Act (Act No. 67 of 1948), Ei-cho, Ijuku-gun, Chiran-cho, Kawabe-gun, and Kawabe-cho, Kawabe - gun , were abolished and their areas were abolished.

Even if these were to be interpreted as significant coverage from a discriminating source, these are not lists of mergers but instead single mentions of single events and therefore don't pass WP:LISTN.

The argument that these are required for navigational purposes is also highly dubious. Just WHAT is it supposed to be helping people navigate? The individual mergers have no articles (nor could they) so it is not helping people navigate mergers. The locations do have articles but we already have pages that would assist with navigating them. Arguing that WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES is the hoariest of old AFD chestnuts.

The argument from Reywas92 is probably the best but it still falls flat - for a page to be a valid WP:SPLIT it has to have stand-along notability and meet the requirements of WP:NOT per WP:AVOIDSPLIT, and this page clearly does not have that. It might be more economical of everyone's time to delete these articles in one go, but Devonian Wombat's strategy of nominating one of them to see what people say is also a valid approach. FOARP (talk) 09:18, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm convinced by FOARP's assessment that these are little more than entries on prefectural ticker tape that serve no navigational or encyclopedic purpose. The whole lot should go.

JoelleJay (talk) 05:39, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. These lists mark the conclusion of the history of individually notable populated places and the beginning of the history of subsequent individually notable places, each with significant effects at the local and prefectural level. While the level of sourcing and development of these sorts of articles could be improved, most of the comments in favor of deletion here do not appear to have been preceded by any WP:BEFORE in the native language. Future development of the article would likely describe the effects of these mergers as a group (in this case, altering and determining the current constituent divisions of Kagoshima Prefecture). As an alternative to having an article on each individual merger, or extended discussion about the individual notability of each merger listed, keeping these sorts of articles seems like a better result. Dekimasuよ! 07:22, 30 September 2023 (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.