Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naruto geography (2nd nomination)
per . This isn't really a notability issue; essentially just a style issue. None of the pages in, say, :Template:Pokemon directory for example, conform to the generic test of . Demanding substantial and credible coverage ''specifically'' on the subject of ''Naruto geography'' is nearly as ludicrous as demanding to see a New York Times|NYT-like article devoted ''specifically'' to the subject of ''lists of Pokemon #461-480''. Credible sources don't write about ''Naruto geography'', ''lists of Pokemon having numbers between 461 and 480'', or ''lists of bridges in China'' in particular -- they write about ''Naruto'', ''Pokemon'', and ''Bridges'', and an exorbitant number of credible texts could be found which attend to those narrower topics but don't go into detail.  agrees: ''"To a limited extent, sub-articles are sometimes born for technical reasons of length or style. Even these articles need real-world information to prove their notability, but must rely on the parent article to provide some of this background material (due to said technical reasons).3 In these situations, the sub-article should be viewed as an extension of the parent article, and judged as if it were still a section of that article."'' Most topics -- Buffy the Vampire Slayer Collectible Card Game for example -- don't have the significance to merit S of this kind; Naruto, being very highly significant, does
— User:XDanielx, 09:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:SS||WP:N||WP:FICT||WP:SPINOUT (Wikipedia:Summary style)