Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1st Seiyu Awards
per  since these greatly simplify reader navigation.  As stated above, the overall awards are notable when stepping back and seeing the reporting on them year to year.  In effect, the worst-case argument would be to delete individual years for failing to meet GNG, but if that is the case, what you end up with is everything has potential to be merged into the parent article because you would only need a single source to |verify facts from a particular year of a notable award.  This makes an extremely large, overbearing page that becomes difficult to navigate (see Audie Award or Eagle Award (comics) for example).  Summary style s greatly improve readablility.  Even if we single out the first award, Anime News Network also covered the those https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/news/2007-03-05/results-of-japan's-first-ever-seiyuu-awards-announced here, and prior to the winner announcements, Anime! Anime had https://animeanime.jp/article/2007/02/28/1539.html this report. Crunchyroll also covered https://www.crunchyroll.com/search?o=n&r=t&q=seiyu+awards 8-12 and 14, so I'd say keep those as well if forced to evaluate individually. Those satisfy me across the board to assume sources , but I don't have the energy to search translated pages for every year.  If more sources are desired by others, though, here are some aids: Search term: 声優アワード {{find sources|声優アワード}} And here are results to sort through from https://animeanime.jp/search.html?q=%E5%A3%B0%E5%84%AA%E3%82%A2%E3%83%AF%E3%83%BC%E3%83%89 Anime! Anime! and https://www.animatetimes.com/search/?q=%E5%A3%B0%E5%84%AA%E3%82%A2%E3%83%AF%E3%83%BC%E3%83%89 Animate Times
— User:2pou, 20:39, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NOTPAPER||WP:V||WP:SPINOUT||WP:NEXIST (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)