Talk:Kenkai

more time?

The article has been here since 2006 with no context, no real substance, no sources, and no improvements. What is it we are waiting for exactly? Beeblbrox (talk) 21:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

If those are problems, then appropriate tags that we should put are ones like {{context}}, {{unreferenced}}, etc. In principle, the poor quality of the article is not a sufficient ground for deletion. Having said this, I'm uncertain of the factuality of the article. I did a quick Google search, but I couldn't find anything on the person. Maybe he is simply too obscure (and that could be why there is not much edit on the article.) In any rate, that article has a problem doesn't translates to that it should be deleted. -- Taku (talk) 21:50, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

• But if there is no information in the article regarding notability, and no one can find any reliable sources to establish notability, or indeed verifiability of the subject, as seems to be the case here, then what is the purpose of this article? Is it improving the project? I don't think so. It could always be re-created if sources were found. Beeblbrox (talk) 22:16, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

I admit, I was under the impression there should be some reliable source when I removed the speedy tag. I agree with the deletion because the article can be recreated quite easily. (Though I still don't think this is a time-critical matter.) -- Taku (talk) 22:48, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Hoax???

Given the Japanese wikipedia article, what is the verifiablity issue that prompted the hoax tag? There's a good solid paragraph on his life and works there, including strong statements as to his notability. —Quasirandom (talk) 20:07, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I put the tag because I can't even verify the birth year of this figure. A pair of the birth year and death year works like a serial number for historical figures, and this is therefore a very bad sign. I am not convinced that this is really a hoax, but the problem I cannot be certain that it is not, either. As discussed above, the deletion seems a natural choice. -- Taku (talk) 21:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't know any Japanese, so perhaps you could look again at that article and see what, if any, coverage the subject has in reliable sources, and let us know what you come up with. If there are sources to back up notability claims, we could just get the Japanese article translated and forget about the proposed deletion. Beeblbrox (talk) 21:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I could have been clearer. The corresponding Japanese article doesn't help much. It cites no sources. The ja article was originally written on Dec 31, 2005, so it's hard to believe the article has survived if it is indeed a hoax. It was created by an anon user, but he seems to have a good track record. But then we cannot be sure if the ip address represents a single person or not. -- Taku (talk) 21:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

So it probably isn't a hoax, but I think that brings us right back around to why I PRODed it in the first place. I'll just clean up the tags and the prod nom and forget the whole hoax thing... Beeblbrox (talk) 22:22, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I think there is 50% (or more) chance that it's a hoax. That the article is orphaned is part of the reason. Since I can't find any mention of the figure even in the passing manner, I cannot even make a link to this article. This is not a good indication at all. But the issue is moot if we are to delete the article anyway. -- Taku (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Hoax would be the wrong tag, then -- {{Verification}} is more like it. This is a good candidate for an article to remand to the Japan and Buddhism WikiProjects for them to work on, as they may have specialized sources that can help with this. —Quasirandom (talk) 00:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Not a hoax. Just a lousy article. I'm traveling and away from most of my resources now (and for the next two weeks), but here are some quick quotes from Nikkoku to establish his existence:

けんかい‐がた【兼海方】

仏語。東密の伝法院流の一派。覚鑁（かくばん）の弟子兼海を祖とするもの。

[Kenkaigata

Buddhist term. A Denpō-in sect of Tōmitsu (Buddhism). Founded by Kenkai, one of Kakuban's disciple.]

いんじゅ‐がた［ヰンジュ：］【院主方】

仏語。兼海院主方（けんかいいんじゅがた）の略称。東密根本一二流の一つである大伝法院流の一つ。覚鑁（かくばん）の弟子兼海、証印のうち、兼海の流れをくむ一派で、証印の流れの、証印方に対する。兼海方。本願方。

[Injugata

Buddhist term. Abbreviation for Kenkai Injugata. Part of Daidenpō-in, one of the twelve fundamental schools of Tōmitsu (Buddhism). In addition to the approval seal of Kenkai, Kakuban's desciple, it is a sect following in the Kenkai schoool as opposed to merely an approved sect. Also known as kenkaigata and hongangata.]

Bendono (talk) 01:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Cool. If you could add those to the article when you get a chance, that'd be a big help. (I'd add them myself, but with my poor excuse for Japanese I'd mess up the citations, sure as rain with a typhoon.) —Quasirandom (talk) 20:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)