Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duanju

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. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 05:25, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Duanju (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Non-notable topic - the MIT source does not mention the article title, and the Chinese source seems to be a primary source and/or blog. LR.127 (talk) 23:15, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and China. LR.127 (talk) 23:15, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:10, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:NEXISTS I was able easily to find, for example:

• Peoples Daily Overseas Ed., AV Market Ushering in a Short Drama Boom 视听市场迎来“短剧热 [1] explaining the phenomenon in many paragraphs
• Guangming Daily News, A Taste of "Cool" and "Sweet" - Don't let these short dramas dominate your life 一味“爽”与“甜” 　别让微短剧离生活越来越远 [2] a Zhejiang Normal University professor commenting on these videos

If there are any concerns about these sources, feel free to say so and I will continue my search.

I don't think the Guangzhou Daily News source linked in the article[3] is a blog entry, since it has a byline and doesn't have a disclaimer about user-generated content. I can't see any way it would be primary. Did I miss something?

Not specifically directed at this editor, but I have noticed a lot of nominations for poorly sourced China-related articles which have substantial native language coverage. To be sure, the problem starts with editors who create poorly sourced articles on China-related topics. But these nominations put a burden on a small number of en.wikipedia editors who follow this board and can handle Chinese language sources. The burden (per WP:BEFORE) is to do a reasonable search, and I believe a search that doesn't fully embrace native language articles is unlikely to be a reasonable one. Oblivy (talk) 00:18, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Keep: I found even better sources by searching for "微短劇" (Wei Duanju, an alternative term for Duanju), which provided me with full articles detailing the history and trends of Duanju from BBC News[4], Initium Media[5], China Times[6], Public Television Service[7], and Sing Tao Daily[8]. Additionally, I found articles from Xinhua News Agency[9] and China News Service[10] using the term "短劇," as well as sources like Wen Wei Po discussing policies the Chinese government is set to implement regarding Duanju[11], and a United Daily News article covering recently popular Duanjus[12]. GNG is clearly fulfilled, and I agree with Oblivy that no BEFORE was conducted before this nomination. Besides, the second source in the article is indeed from Guangzhou Daily[13]. It is certainly not a "primary source and/or blog", it is a national newspaper. The nominator has clearly provided a flawed source assessment. —Prince of Erebor（The Book of Mazarbul） 13:11, 29 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The sources found by Oblivy and Prince of Erebor definitively establish that Duanju passes Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. Thank you both for your detailed searches for sources here and at other Chinese-topic AfDs. I endorse Oblivy's comment here:

  But these nominations put a burden on a small number of en.wikipedia editors who follow this board and can handle Chinese language sources. The burden (per WP:BEFORE) is to do a reasonable search, and I believe a search that doesn't fully embrace native language articles is unlikely to be a reasonable one.

  and made a similar comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newland Digital Technology. Cunard (talk) 11:45, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Believe it or not, at least one fourth of the human being on this planet have watched Duanjus.

Iuliusnanus (talk) 22:47, 2 October 2024 (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.