Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yukichi Chuganji (4th nomination)

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 delete. Randykitty (talk) 14:31, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yukichi Chuganji

[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)

No independent notability besides this person's reaching an advanced age. His entries on the List of the verified oldest men and List of Japanese supercentenarians are sufficient. — JFG ^talk 16:20, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, such extraordinarily advanced age should always be regarded as notable. (How many AfD nominations in how quick succession -- the last was in September -- should be tolerated before more become barred as a nuisance?) LE (talk) 17:53, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nowhere in any notability guideline or policy does it say "oldest X is notable" or "living to age X is notable". CommanderLinx (talk) 06:30, 23 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CommanderLinx is correct, and I would add that complaining that there were previous AfD's so more should be banned is the sign of a weak argument. You can't defend the article on its merits, so you try to save it on a technicality redline you yourself want to retroactively create. Newshunter12 (talk) 02:20, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 18:46, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This article blatantly fails WP:GNG, WP:BIO1E, and WP:NOPAGE. There is no policy that the "oldest x" is notable and this article is packed with longevity fancruft like mundane record explanations, number of living children, and the standard longevity secret. His name, life dates, and nationality are best handled on the four lists they already reside on. This WP:PERMASTUB is not needed. Newshunter12 (talk) 02:20, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A policy that YES, the oldest living man is notable is what is needed! LE (talk) 07:04, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete just living a long time does not make one notable. This is not the Guiness Book of World Records.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:47, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Redirect to appropriate list. WP:NOPAGE should almost certainly apply here. There is never going to be more than the absolute bare basics to say about him. He was born, he had a daughter, bred silkworms, became oldest living man and then died. Throw in some fluffy trivia about predecessors/successor and that someone else was older but now isn't recognised but this WP:PERMASTUB is easily handled on a list somewhere. CommanderLinx (talk) 11:30, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So a man this extraordinarily ancient does not rate an article but Patrick Bouvier Kennedy does? LE (talk) 17:08, 26 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Facepalm . And read Zhuangzi on Pengzu. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 05:27, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Second the above facepalm. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS and WP:WAX are not valid arguments for keeping this one. But feel free to nominate that one for deletion if you want. CommanderLinx (talk) 11:34, 27 November 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.