Draft talk:Kogane
 | This draft was nominated for deletion on 17 May 2026. The result of the discussion was delete. |
 | This draft does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||
Discussion copied from User talk:Randykitty
edit@Dora Megan: @Randykittypointed out that discussion of the article belonges here not there, so:
Hallo @Dora Megan I've looked at Draft:Kogane and tweaked it a little: the Reuters article calls her "Kokin" so that seems worth a mention (and a redirect when/if she gets back into mainspace). I found a piece in Australian ABC news. (When I used Google translate on the Chinadaily source, it spelled her variously as "Kokin", "Gujin" and "Gu Jin"!)
I reworked the lead sentence: the statement in that first sentence should usually be "X is/was a Y", where "Y" is the occupation or profession for which they are notable. "X was born in Z" or "X was the daughter of Z" suggests lack of notability, and makes the article less likely to pass AfC or survive AfD. I've reworked it somewhat. It rather looks as if the AfC reviewers and AfD commenters consider that "sources" means "English language sources".
But what I find puzzling is that there seem to be no sources either noting her death (plenty of "Oldest geisha dies" headlines, but referring to earlier people) or celebrating her 100th, 110th, etc birthdays. I don't read Japanese, you obviously do from the sources you cite: why hasn't there been any more recent coverage of her? Strange. I think AfC reviewers might find this equally puzzling - born 1907 so unlikely to be still alive, but should be being celebrated for longevity if so, and if not alive surely the death of a notable person would be noted? PamD 4:28 pm, Today (UTC+1)
- @Dora Megan I notice that the article was tagged for AfD just 53 minutes after you had created it and 21 minutes after you had last edited it. I don't think that is good practice. But another time, if you have work still to do on an article, please add {{in use}} while you are actively editing it, and {{under construction}} if you have more which you plan to add within hours or days. Those templates should protect an article from hasty deletion unless it is obvious rubbish (not the case here).
- @Randykitty Do you think this AfD timescale was reasonable? I note that the guidelines at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Step 1. Checks and alternatives before nominating, point C2, say If the article was recently created, consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article, which didn't happen here - it could have been tagged for notability, but AfD seems premature. PamD 4:45 pm, Today (UTC+1)