Talk:Stolen Artifacts from Asia found in Japan

This article was nominated for deletion on 31 August, 2005. The result of the discussion was keep.

Untitled

It is not clear whether it was stolen, or it was sold. For ex. About Korea, there are many records of trading paintings/books with Japanese antique shops. Could you show me the reference to write as the page title.
Even if the page-title has some truth, then what's the reason to create a special page only for japan? Are you also going to create for 'Artifacts from World found in British Museum'? If so, I'll see your work. -Poo-T 16 Nov 2004

New article proposal

The current article amounts to an accusation that Japan has art treasures, et al., which it took from Korea, et al., during the pre-war colonial period. I'd suggesst a new article, called something like:

Japanese cultural artifacts controversy

And change the accusation into a description of the various campaigns that activists have launched to force the returns of these museum pieces.

Deleting the article is foolish. Just re-write it. Uncle Ed 14:25, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

AfD result

I enclose my closing remarks in full:

The result of the debate was Keep. Though ostensibly there is a huge delete consensus, many of the delete voters seem to believe that content could be merged--since there is more than one article author this is not possible. Another reason for deletion given is the name--this can be solved by moving the article. One delete voter wanted deletion "per nom" although in fact the nominator was asking for merge suggestions.

There is therefore no consensus on a course of actions that can be performed under the GFDL. I therefore invoke the cornerstone of our deletion policy: When in doubt, don't delete.

This is a problem that cannot be solved by AfD. I ask those who think the content is useful to find a suitable article and merge, and those who think the title is wrong to move it to a new title and delete the redirect.

Closing is difficult, and it's easy to get it wrong. I would not oppose an early relisting of this article if anyone feels strongly that I have got it wrong. --Tony Sidaway ^Talk 11:10, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Open items

Did Japan sign the UNESCO convention for return of artifacts? All the article says is that they thought about it. RJFJR 03:29, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]