Deletion of Samurai Baby

Comment: I do not care too much about this nomination. Please note that  does not require foreign publication or licensing for notability. The article still lacks the other criteria of notability though, so delete
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BK)

Comment: Well currently common sense say that not much in the article can be proved. What can make me believe that the informations are accurate, point of view neutral & containing no original research? Third party RS coverages are here to ensure that and not just that the article can be kept. As far as it can go the article can be "near-emptied" with a strict reading of |verifiability policy. I prefer no article than empty husk while some editors like to collect them like seashells
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)

Comment: Only three volumes in seven years? That could mean one of two things. It's published infrequently which is an indication that it is unpopular, or we don't have a verifiable end date of publication. I would actually assume the latter. But if all we can write about the manga is a plot summary, then common sense will tell us that we shouldn't have an article about it. Encyclopedic articles should contain |sourced information about the manga's development, reception, and influence
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V)