Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ayame Ikehata
Ah, but that's the very nature of Wikipedia's definitions of "notability", Quasirandom. We are here as editors, not authorities. For us-- or some of us-- to set ourselves up as authorities and to start making up definitions of "notability" violates all the best Wiki-values, such as NPOV and Original Research. These "notability" defitions only serve as a tool for those wishing to help promote their own bias here-- through deletion, or for those seeking Adminship to rack up authoritarian-like decisions. The only ''good'' they serve is to temporarily divert Deletionists' time into spinning out crack-pot definitions instead of removing other editors' good contributions. You'll note that since the article now in question has been shown to pass , one of its leading authors has not changed his !vote, but is probably working hard to re-define "notability" to exclude this particular article, while preserving those in which he may have some interest
— User:Dekkappai, 18:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:PORNBIO (Wikipedia:Notability)