Deletion of Fascinating Woman: The Temptation of Creampie

Comment: What right do we have to declare an award in a notable Japanese award ceremony as unimportant? There are over 20 Oscar_nominations|Oscar category awards and even getting nominated for just one estabilishes a certain notabililty. So how would we as non experts tell that a place 6 award in Japan lacks relevance? At least I have not seen any prove for this here. I am also impressed of the deep knowledge that Dekkappai and Cherryblossom1982 have in that field, so there is nothing to add to their comphrehensive explanations which even for an (open) western eye should make the inclusion of this article plausible. Both main editors are hardworking experts and would be loss for Wikipedia when stopping their contributions. Furthermore the nominator lacks obviously and without any doubt  in this area which even goes to name-calling of involved editorshttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=375897186http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=375915608http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=376082318
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view (WP:NPOV)

Comment: Fails  and . The Pink Grand Prix is not a "major award", and coming eighth place is not an award win anyway
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:NOTFILM)

Comment: Perhaps the most important false statement in the nomination, and in some Delete votes, is that this film does not pass . It most certainly ''does'' pass per Wikipedia:Notability_(films)#General_principles, "The film has received a major award for excellence in some aspect of filmmaking." This is noted, "This criterion is secondary. Most films that satisfy this criterion already satisfy the first criterion." (First criterion: "The film is widely distributed and has received full length reviews by two or more nationally known critics.") This note, in my experience, is correct, as I have stated above. As indicated by this notable award, these films ''are'' covered by reviews and secondary sources, but because of the barriers of language, Japanese sourcing availability, and distance, these sources are found more slowly than are their English equivalents. Also, these films ''are'' distributed nationally through OP Eiga, 50 years history as perhaps ''the'' major pink film studio. This latter fact further passes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(films)#Other_evidence_of_notability, "The film was successfully distributed domestically in a country that is not a major film producing country, and was produced by that country's equivalent of a "major film studio." Articles on such a film should assert that the film in question was notable for something more than merely having been produced, and if any document can be found to support this, in any language, it should be cited." OP is a major studio, and the award is proof beyond its "merely having been produced". There is no valid reason to delete this article
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTFILM)

Comment: Pink film is notable, many specific pink films are notable, I accept the award as apparently notable, and I appreciate that there are articles on them.  I'd like to see more thorough coverage of pornography on Wikipedia.  This specific film is not WP-notable, however.  The film is lacking the sort of |significant coverage from |Reliable sources and consequent |verifiability one would want for an encyclopedia article.  Instead of prose following the topics in Wikipedia:Manual of Style (film) there are bare statements of fact as to having gotten the award, the cast, crew, and a brief plot outline, essentially  apart from a short lede.  If that's all that can be written, then that's a problem.  Merely winning an award is ''not'' a guarantee a film is notable by WP's standards Wikipedia:Notability (films), only a general indicator it ''might'' be if there are RS for things other than the mere fact of winning the award.  It's the existence of RS treating the film as the subject at length that is the measure of WP-notability.  This film could be better treated in a list of films that won the award, if that
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:RS||WP:V||WP:PLOTONLY)

Comment: Per the reasoned comments above that avoided rhetoric and antipathy, as notability in Japan is notable enough for en.Wikipedia.  Western (or personal) POV should never be used to negatively color discussion of Eastern film, Eastern art, or Eastern culture, as cultural standards greatly vary. Calling something from another country "obscure" is a bit much, as  is not a criteria for deletion
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:UNKNOWNHERE)