Japan Time (TV series) : WP:BEFORE searches fail to find any sources to back up notability.  Cheers!  Fake scientist 8000 23:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Hong Kong .  Cheers!  Fake scientist 8000 23:34, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources .  Japanese sources: "「秋田犬ふれあいライン」PR. 香港、台湾から誘客へ" ["Akita dog contact line" PR. Attracting customers from Hong Kong and Taiwan].  Hokuroku Shimbun [ ja ] (in Japanese).  2016-12-22.  Archived from the original on 2023-05-11 .  Retrieved 2023-05-11 .  The article notes from Google Translate: "In order to promote the Akita Inu Fureai Line," a sightseeing route centered on the northern region, and to attract inbound tourists (foreign visitors to Japan), filming by a Hong Kong program production company and a well-known Taiwanese blogger was held in the region.  The group covered the food and culture of each region, with a focus on Akita dogs, and is scheduled to be broadcast on TV programs in Hong Kong and on subway stations in Taiwan from next year.  ...   The Hong Kong film crew is local's Japanese travel program "Go! Japan ... The Hong Kong program is about 25 minutes long and will be broadcast four times from January 28, 2010."" Chiba, Sonoko 千葉園子 (December 2022). "香港、台湾で秋田犬PR.  CNAなどが県内ロケ" [Akita Inu PR in Hong Kong and Taiwan. CNA and other locations in the prefecture]. Akita Sakigake Shimpō (in Japanese). Archived from the original on 2023-05-11 . Retrieved 2023-05-11 . The article notes from Google Translate: "From Hong Kong, will be able to produce it together with the popular Japanese travel crew.  The route connecting Kosaka town is seen in the travel program "Go! Japan", which promotes Akita in Hong Kong and Taiwan, so it will be a work that is directly linked to attracting customers.   ...  On this day, the Hong Kong film crew moved to Kakunodate Station (Senboku City) on the Akita Nairiku Jukan Railway.  ...  The program will be broadcast in four parts in Hong Kong from the end of next month.  The duration of one broadcast is approximately 25 minutes. " Matsuda, Mototsugu 松田基継 (2016-07-09). "鉄道観光もいかが 香港番組が本県入り" [How about railroad sightseeing? Hong Kong program enters the prefecture]. Mutsu Shinpo [ ja ] (in Japanese). Archived from the original on 2023-05-11 . Retrieved 2023-05-11 . Hong Kong sources: Wong, Kei-wan 王奇雲 (2014-09-22). "影心口節目" [Filming words and thoughts program]. am730 (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2023-05-11 . Retrieved 2023-05-11 . The article notes from Google Translate: "Some people say that I have been targeting Asia Television all the time, and I am extremely cynical about their programs.  In fact, I am wronged.  I am only "right on the matter and not on the station".  If there is a good program, I will approve it and introduce it.  For example, last Saturday in the evening, when I was having dinner at home, I was attracted by one of their travel programs.  You must watch it and turn it on.  The program is called Japan Time !  There are two program hosts: the Japanese girl Rie and the Hong Kong boy Jam.  They can't be said to be pretty boys and girls, but they are fun and entertaining.  They speak Cantonese and Japanese at the same time.  In that episode, they introduced the filming location of the Japanese drama "Ama" in "Kuji" city.  I saw the class boss Qinghai girl diving into the water to collect sea urchins.  I really drool.  Yes, yes, I drool over the sea urchin , not those divers.  The original program started broadcasting in 2005 and was broadcast on International Channel Hong Kong and Taiwan rebroadcast.  Look at the layout, it seems to be outsourced, bridge construction, production, post-production by production company kick , TV station should not pay money , at any time The advertising fee will be added!  The "Japan Tourism Bureau" and the airline are behind the program Sponsorship without big star spending , so there is a long shot, but it is a pity that there was no Who knows, right now they have made more than 400 episodes..."  Leung, Sammy (2014). "亞視將亡確感可惜" [It's a pity that ATV will die]. Sing Tao Daily (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2023-05-11 . Retrieved 2023-05-11 . The column notes: "而隨後的《日語大放送就是簡單有趣的日本旅遊誌,雖然它介紹的地點有些我們未必會去,但兩位主持 Rie 和 Jam 相當風趣幽默，有時又會在日文當中夾雜一、兩句廣東話，既親切又地道。 若然亞視真要完結，我最捨不得的應該是這兩個節目了。 " From Google Translate: "And the subsequent "Japanese Big Show" is a simple and interesting Japanese travel journal.  Although it introduces some places that we may not go to, the two hosts, Rie and Jam, are quite humorous, and sometimes they will include a sentence or two of Cantonese in Japanese.  The words are both kind and authentic.  If ATV is really going to end, these two programs should be the ones I'm most reluctant to part with. " Wong, Git-ling 黃潔玲 (2014-03-05). Lee, Oi-ming 李藹明 (ed.). "一家去旅行：放任假期童玩「野」 大自然就是遊樂場" [Traveling as a family: letting go of the holidays. Children play "wild". Nature is playground]. Ming Pao (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2016-04-23 . Retrieved 2023-05-11 . The article notes: "香港製作的日語旅遊節目《日語大放送》，自2005年起播放至今，雖然在亞視播放，節目卻一直不乏支持者，更是香港史上最長壽的旅遊節目。 邱忠業（Jam）是主持之一，節目中他與拍檔以日語和廣東話，鬼馬地介紹日本許多好玩地方；" From Google Translate: "Hong Kong-produced Japanese-language travel program "Japanese Broadcasting" has been broadcast since 2005.  Although it is aired on ATV, the program has always had a lot of supporters, and it is the longest-running travel program in Hong Kong's history.  Qiu Zhongye (Jam) is one of the hosts.  In the show, he and his partner introduce many interesting places in Japan in Japanese and Cantonese. " Long, C (2018-06-26). "【日本人在香港】在港藝人理惠的兩個家" [[Japanese in Hong Kong] The two homes of artiste Rie in Hong Kong]. Metro Pop [ zh ] (in Chinese). Metro International . Archived from the original on 2022-03-20 . Retrieved 2023-05-11 . The article notes: "因為主持電視節目《日本大放送》而深入民心的理惠（Rie）" From Google Translate: "Rie, who is deeply rooted in the hearts of the people because of hosting the TV show "Japan Time"" There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Japan Time ( Chinese : Go! Japan TV 日本大放送 ), formerly known as ( Chinese : 日語大放送 ), to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline , which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard ( talk ) 08:01, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong Keep: per Cunard 's work Jack4576 ( talk ) 11:16, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Twitter can not be used as a source. Two of the other sources appear to be from blogs. Another is a travel piece but I can't tell if it's about the subject or not, the translation is kind of difficult. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:07, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] My understanding is that Twitter can be used as a source where appropriate. Nevertheless, it is not the only source being relied upon here. The use of blogs is also fine if consensus can be reached that the usage is appropriate. Jack4576 ( talk ) 04:12, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] In no circumstance is a tweet an indicator of notability ( WP:TWITTER covers the very limited usages of them). These tweets are photos of newspapers, and the newspaper articles themselves might be valid sources, but it's difficult to say with the limited information provided. Dylnuge ( Talk • Edits ) 04:42, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yeah sorry no WP:TWITTER is pretty clear here same with blogs as per WP:BLOGS . Don't get me wrong I've used Twitter as a source but only as a last resort. An example would be in the article List of most-followed Twitch channels where I had to use Twitter as a source because there was legit nothing else out there I could find. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:42, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The source eval above clearly shows there is not SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth . Mentions, promo material, interviews, do not show notability. // Timothy :: talk 04:28, 18 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: Japan Time is notable because it received substantial coverage in the Hong Kong newspaper am730 and the Japanese newspaper Mutsu Shinpo [ ja ] . It also received significant coverage in the Hong Kong newspapers Sing Tao Daily and Ming Pao and the Japanese newspapers Akita Sakigake Shimpō and Hokuroku Shimbun [ ja ] . Rie, one of the two television presenters for Japan Time , used her Livedoor blog and Twitter account to share the media coverage her television show received. According to Ming Pao , Japan Time is "the longest-running travel program in Hong Kong's history". The actor Sammy Leung wrote in Sing Tao Daily , " Japan Time is a simple and interesting Japanese travel journal. Although it introduces some places that we may not go to, the two hosts, Rie and Jam, are quite humorous."  Writing in am730 , columnist Kei-wan Wong said that readers have said that he is always targeting Asia Television and being "cynical" of their programmes. He said, "I am wronged. ... If there is a good program, I will approve it and introduce it."  Wong said Japan Time is that show, writing, "I was attracted by one of [Asia Television's] travel programs". He wrote that the Japan Time programme hosts Rie and Jam were "fun and entertaining", discussed its history (it began broadcasting in 2005, has 400 episodes, is broadcast in Hong Kong, and is rebroadcast in Taiwan), and discussed its layout and production and sponsors. Cunard ( talk ) 06:38, 18 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty ( talk ) 09:08, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 03:27, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The "Keep" responses follow a common misunderstanding on Wikipedia policies and their use in AfDs with the "web search hits mention it, therefore keep". Thankfully this AfD has not been unbalanced or influenced by canvassing from outside Wikipedia or from on-wiki WikiProjects. Because AfD discussion resolution can be decided on votes and ostensible consensus, canvassing can be effective and the AfD closer may opt to go with the numbers game. I respectfully ask that the soundness of arguments made and Wikipedia policies are the focus when closing the AfD. The one non-trivial "Keep" answer says that blogs and Twitter tweets are "independent reliable sources", which the editor had added to the article since the AfD nom was made [32] . This is an incorrect understanding of  what "reliable" on Wikipedia means. Blogs and Twitter do not fit this definition. Instead the "Keep" answer shows why the article should be deleted. Assuming the sourcing were what Wikipedia deems reliable and weren't blogs, tweets, and short mentions here or there, the most in-depth coverage is a short synopsis and minor details like over 400 episodes which is not detailed or in-depth about this show which is not nearly enough for GNG. Despite the show's longevity, information and coverage is sparse. I admire the editor's effort to improve the article since the nom but it does not demonstrate the presumption of notability or why the article should be kept according to policies. Saucysalsa30 ( talk ) 05:13, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The "Keep" responses follow a common misunderstanding on Wikipedia policies and their use in AfDs with the "web search hits mention it, therefore keep". – which "keep" responses do this? The one non-trivial "Keep" answer says that blogs and Twitter tweets are "independent reliable sources", which the editor had added to the article since the AfD nom was made [33] . – I did not say that blogs and Twitter posts are independent reliable sources. I said that the newspaper articles I added to the Wikipedia article are independent reliable sources. I said that Japan Times received substantial coverage in the Hong Kong newspaper am730 and the Japanese newspaper Mutsu Shinpo [ ja ] . No one in this AfD has explained why those two newspaper articles are insufficient to establish notability. Cunard ( talk ) 07:25, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] which "keep" responses do this? Yours and the one-liner agreeing with you, like Timothy and Dr Vulpes kindly pointed out. This is a very common mistake that even the most experienced editors fall into so I'm not saying you did anything wrong. In an AfD I saw yesterday, an experienced editor with over 10 years and over 100k edits believed that someone's personal blog barely name-dropping someone is a reason to "weak keep", but nonetheless keep, an article. I said that Japan Times received substantial coverage in the Hong Kong newspaper am730 and the Japanese newspaper Mutsu Shinpo Yes you said this but can you please share this "substantial coverage" in am730 and Mutsu Shinpo? Twitter and a couple blogs, one of which is defunct, don't help. Even if theoretically that serious problem did not exist, what we're left with are a couple short mentions in local newspapers per the tweet screencaps. This isn't substantial and nowhere close, and what is written is very minimal. am730 (the scope and reliability is not known) and Japan Times didn't see it fit to put this on their online newspaper? No one in this AfD has explained why those two newspaper articles are insufficient to establish notability. Respectfully, four people already have explained. See above and my other comment, and the comments by Dr Vulpes, Dylnuge, and Timothy. If all it took were a couple short newspaper articles to prove notability, which in this case are not provided, then a Wikipedia article could be made about practically anything. No, this does not in any way establish notability. We can't even presume notability per GNG, which itself is an assumption. The case for keeping this is spurious, based on the invalid assumption that a few tweets from the program's host screencapping short newspaper pieces (2 of which are focused on a dog) and a couple blog posts including by the same program host, are significant, in-depth, independent from each other, sourcing. What you quoted from the blog posts barely mention the show except the first one. The threshold for inclusion on Wikipedia is very low but this is far from meeting it. This program has been running for 18 years yet very little has been said about it including in local media and despite the best efforts for promotion. That's as telling as all other reasons to delete it. Saucysalsa30 ( talk ) 23:26, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Two sources that establish notability are: Matsuda, Mototsugu 松田基継 (2016-07-09). "鉄道観光もいかが 香港番組が本県入り" [How about railroad sightseeing? Hong Kong program enters the prefecture]. Mutsu Shinpo [ ja ] (in Japanese). Wong, Kei-wan 王奇雲 (2014-09-22). "影心口節目" [Filming words and thoughts program]. am730 (in Chinese). They are not "Twitter and a couple blogs". They are not "a couple short mentions in local newspapers". They are newspaper articles about Japan Time . Both the Hong Kong newspaper am730 and the Japanese newspaper Mutsu Shinpo [ ja ] are reputable sources. Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline says: " Significant coverage " addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. Two newspaper articles about Japan Time "addres[s] the topic directly and in detail". That a Hong Kong television programme has received substantial coverage internationally in Japan in addition to Hong Kong strongly establishes it is notable. Cunard ( talk ) 23:57, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Honestly if I felt there was a good case to keep I'd support it because it looks like a fun program, but unfortunately not. Two articles don't "establish notability", and in terms of verifiability we do not have the articles. All we have is program host Rie's pictures on her social media. How does a short blurb from a tabloid am730, conveyed by a screencap on Rie's blog, "establish notability" of anything? Something notable, especially a program running for 18 years, will have thousands of media, possibly including books, covering it, its history, challenges, leadership, operations, all of that. Both the Hong Kong newspaper am730 and the Japanese newspaper Mutsu Shinpo [ja] are reputable sources. No case has been made for their reputability, especially for Mutsu Shinpo, a small local newspaper in Hirosaki. What I can find about am730 is that it's a Hong Kong based tabloid (tabloids usually have a bad rep). It's with the South China Morning Post Group which is owned by Alibaba Group which the Chinese government has tight control on. At this point, 4 editors have taken the time to explain why the single case for keeping this article has not been great. I've realized that if someone needs to dig through the program host's social media from 2016 to find minimal evidence to tell us little more than the program exists, there's not much of a case to be made to show that it's notable. TimothyBlue summed it up much more succinctly than I. I've said what I've had to say, so I'll leave the rest up to the closing admin(s). Saucysalsa30 ( talk ) 06:23, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Significant coverage in two reliable sources establishes notability. From Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline : There is no fixed number of sources required since sources vary in quality and depth of coverage, but multiple sources are generally expected. Sources do not have to be available online or written in English . Wiktionary defines the word "multiple" as being "more than one". From Wikipedia:Verifiability#Access to sources , "Do not reject reliable sources just because they are difficult or costly to access. Some reliable sources are not easily accessible. For example, an online source may require payment, and a print-only source may be available only through libraries." am730 is sufficiently reliable for a review of a television programme. According to this 2014 article in South China Morning Post , am730 was ranked the ninth most credible Hong Kong print media publication out of 22 surveyed. It ranked ahead of 17th place Apple Daily , which is "marginally reliable (i.e. neither generally reliable nor generally unreliable ), and may be usable depending on context " according to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources . The am730 article provides multiple paragraphs of coverage (at least 276 words when translated from Chinese to English) about the subject. It is not "a short blurb". I consider Mutsu Shinpo [ ja ] to be a sufficiently reliable regional newspaper based on these sources: Page 107 of this 1985 journal article says: "こ うした事 情 の下 に,八 戸市 の『デ ー リー東北 』と 弘前 市 の 『陸 奥 新報 』 は 「主読 紙」 的地 域紙 と して の地位 を確 立 して お り,判 型 な ど体裁 の上 で全 国紙 や 県 紙 に 準 じる ば か りで は な く,内 容 の 面 で も全 国 ・... 後 者 も,前 者 ほ どの実勢 は ない もの の, 「津軽 に生 きるみ んな の新 聞」を標 語 に津軽 地方 に広 く展 開 を試 み て い る。" From Google Translate: "Under these circumstances, Hachinohe City's "Daily Tohoku" and Hirosaki City's "Mutsu Shinpo" have established themselves as 'main readers' regional papers.  Not only do they conform to national and prefectural newspapers in terms of appearance such as format, but also in terms of content, it is nationwide.  ...  Although the latter is not as popular as the former, it is also trying to expand widely in the Tsugaru region under the slogan 'Newspaper for everyone living in Tsugaru'. " According to this 2004 journal article , "The Mutsu Shinpō , headquartered in Hirosaki, is, conversely, considered a Tsugaru-centered newspaper, claiming a circulation of just over 50,000.  In research unrelated to this project, readership of local newspapers in Hirosaki City was indicated by survey respondents as higher than that of national newspapers.  In addition, the local newspaper was documented as an important information source, ranking second behind television news, with both the amount of information supplied and the accuracy of the information related to local issues supplied by the newspaper rated as weakly positive by local residents. " The footnote says, "See Rausch (2002); readership of the Tōōnippō was reported at 67 percent and the Mutsu Shinpō at 26 percent, while the national-level Yomiuri Shinbun and the Asahi Shinbun were reported at 14 and 17 percent, respectively. " Cunard ( talk ) 07:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep