Deletion of Miri Hanai

Comment: Sorry for the absence. I've been off Wikipedia for three weeks. I still think there are significant faults in most of the nominator's claims, beginning of course with the gross error of not understanding who this person was before nominating for delete. (That was why I quickly accumulated some sources to show that  had not been properly performed.) Most of the sources I listed are not self-promotion in that they are produced by reliable third party sources, and are not self-produced. I already made the argument that the claim of "tabloids" (and thus that these fail ) is not supported. Also, all of the sources I provided have her name in the title and thus are not "passing mentions." However, the nominator has made one important point, which is that many of the sources available are close to what one could call interviews. There is an argument that can be made that the very fact someone is interviewed by a reliable third-party publication is a sign of notability, but as  states these have to be treated with caution. I finally had time to do a bit more searching, and I must confess I found it hard to find articles on the net that are not in that category (with some exceptions, like https://news.biglobe.ne.jp/entertainment/0924/mcz_170924_8743482725.html). I checked Web Oya, the database of the Oya Soichi Bunko, the primary scholarly database for popular magazines, and she has 138 articles listed, but about 130 of those are classified as gurabia or interviews. There are a few of articles not classified as either of those in well-known weekly magazines such as Flash (June 2009 and March 2003) and Friday (April 2006), but I cannot check those personally. Again, it is clear from the fact she has had 138 articles that she is a popular gravure idol, but I am not well versed enough in that world to judge whether she "Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following" or "Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions" to the gurabia world. She thus still might be notable under  but I confess I don't know that world enough. That is why I still have not voted keep or delete. My initial participation in this AfD was, again, to correct some major errors on the part of the nominator
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion (WP:BEFORE||WP:V||WP:INTERVIEW||WP:ENTERTAINER)

Comment: WP:PORNBIO is irrelevant here since she is not a porn actress. Even her Japanese Wiki page does not categorize her that way. She is a gravure idol, which is different. A brief search of Japanese news sites come up with the kind of coverage one expects of a well-known gravure idol: http://ascii.jp/elem/000/001/571/1571186/, http://wpb.shueisha.co.jp/2016/06/28/66955/, http://www.asagei.com/excerpt/73196, https://www.excite.co.jp/News/entertainment_g/20170504/TokyoSports_681784.html, http://www.sanspo.com/geino/news/20170509/gra17050915360001-n1.html, https://www.excite.co.jp/News/entertainment_g/20170501/Real_Live_33263.html, https://www.excite.co.jp/News/entertainment_g/20170220/Real_Live_32390.html, https://www.excite.co.jp/News/entertainment_g/20160606/Real_Live_28592.html, https://www.excite.co.jp/News/entertainment_g/20141215/Real_Live_21402.html, https://www.excite.co.jp/News/entertainment_g/20140312/Cobs_38367.html, https://www.excite.co.jp/News/entertainment_g/20140310/Real_Live_17450.html, https://news.mynavi.jp/article/20170502-a344/, https://news.biglobe.ne.jp/entertainment/0924/mcz_170924_8743482725.html, etc. Since it is hard to apply  to gravure idols, it might be best to simply consider her in relation to 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACTOR||WP:GNG)

Comment: Whether she does porn or is an actress really isn't important. She still fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ENT)

Comment: To make an argument about , you need to argue that the sources themselves are not reliable. Picking what you in your personal opinion think are frivolous quotes is not an argument. (I can find quotes from the same articles that give pertinent information about her career, etc.) Some of these articles are from major news organizations in Japan such as Tokyo Sports, Sankei Sports, ''ASCII'', Asahi Geino, Shukan Playboy, etc., which are used all over the English Wikipedia, especially in entertainment coverage. , again, does not ask us to judge whether the content fits some standard of "serious" coverage (a word it does not use; it also does not mention the word "tabloid"), precisely because it wants to avoid personal bias. The issue is whether the publication sources are "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy." If you have an argument that the above newspapers and magazines do not fit that, please present it
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:V)