Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Copic

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep‎. (non-admin closure) Cavarrone 08:35, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Copic

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nonnotable brand of markers --Altenmann >talk 16:06, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Japan. Shellwood (talk) 16:51, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: They are by far one of the most popular alcohol-based markers in the art market. They have gotten coverage on the London Evening Standard (link, link), CBS News link, Creative Bloq (link), and ARTnews (link). On the Japanese side, they have been covered by Bijutsu Techo [ja] (link) and Tō-Ō Nippō (link). lullabying (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, colleague, I dont know japanese, but all english links are nothing but adverts, i.e., fail "independence" criterion of WP:GNG. --Altenmann >talk 19:58, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  The London Evening Standard and ARTnews links are at the very least product reviews. I also recommend you check out the Japanese sources too because Copic is also a Japanese company. lullabying (talk) 20:16, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  Oh, really? ". These are markers to invest in. They are beloved for their beautiful pigments, smooth-flowing ink, and easy blending. Each marker is also incredibly versatile, with a chisel tip and a superb brush tip that performs almost like a paintbrush. " Some product review. --Altenmann >talk 21:11, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BEFORE. Please see the sources found, There's lots of coverage also in Google Books. Bearian (talk) 00:15, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Although I couldn't find @Bearian's "sources found" (a diff perhaps?) there are some books devoted to the markers although some seem to be intro-to-the-markers books rather than independent content. But I see Yasaiko Midorihana, How to Render Attractive Characters with COPIC Markers (2022) which seems to have made it into libraries. And this [1] which devotes four paragraphs (and a bit of a later one) to the markers. That plus what's already in the article should be sufficient. Oblivy (talk) 02:09, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The diff is in the header. Click on "books". Bearian (talk) 08:51, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
On my results, the first five of those books have Covic branding on the front. I think there are a number of "books" which are actually how-to sales promotion items. A few books and many articles describing and recommending them, and the Midorihana book. I get results for a few others, but it's really hard to appraise without seeing the book. Oblivy (talk) 09:29, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep very notable. Also OP didn't provide anything to back their claim nor did they elaborate.176.28.150.183 (talk) 12:50, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Please, OP, if you feel that an article's topic is not notable, do not wp:blank the article (like this) cuz that is considered wp:vandalism, but instead nominate it for deletion like you just did here. Thanks. 176.28.150.183 (talk) 13:02, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as well as agree with the IP editor's comment warning against WP:BLANKING of a page, but it looks like the OP learned that and properly posted this, though a WP:BEFORE appears to have been minimally or not all undertaken, that is another problem. Regardless, the article passes GNG and should be kept. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:37, 6 July 2025 (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.