Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/China

WP:DSZH

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to China. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|China|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to China. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Asia.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/China/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also: Wikipedia:China-related topics notice board

China

Deng Xiaolan

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

Questionable notability. This article should be moved to draft. Amigao (talk) 22:13, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Women, Music, Politics, Olympics, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:12, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the biography is rather comprehensive, and there exists a comparable article on the Chinese Wikipedia. I have incorporated more sources and information to satisfy the inclusion criteria. TinaLees-Jones (talk) 23:27, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge This seems like WP:MILL CCP member with a bit of propaganda press. Adding some of that detail to her father's (much more notable person) page would be DUE. I think the press she does get is more because her father was so notable. For Americans this would be like having a biography for Henry Luce III. Czarking0 (talk) 03:06, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@The Account 2: I'll stop messaging you if it is too much but I thought you might like to look at this one. Czarking0 (talk) 02:44, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Haha don't worry, it's ok. Hmm, well I'm not really an expert on Wikipedia's inclusion criteria but the question seems to be what makes her independently notable? Is there enough coverage by reliable sources? The Account 2 (talk) 10:18, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is enough coverage of her to meet WP:GNG. DaffodilOcean (talk) 13:22, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, seems to meet WP:GNG based on the sources in the article. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 13:33, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Lonsdale (entrepreneur)

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

Only 1 article links to this. Seems rather promotional. Marked for COI concerns noting edits from this editor. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, China, Hong Kong, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per NOM. Appears promotional, with little to justify an article. Even with the terribly low bar for WP:GNG, this article appears to fail. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 06:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:01, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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. The consensus is clear to keep this article. Few sources have been shared and other exists in Chinese specifically per the discussion. Their inclusion does not affect any policy and provides further information which adds to WP:GNG. That was the consensus in short. For addition of sources here, kudos to Iiii I I I and Jumpytoo. (non-admin closure) HilssaMansen19 (talk) 09:56, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Xiaobailou station

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

Doesn't satisfy WP:N and the only source is WP:PRIMARY DankPedia (talk) 05:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and China. DankPedia (talk) 05:54, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Stations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:10, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Line 1 (Tianjin Metro) as the line serving the station, as a WP:ATD-R. S5A-0043🚎^{(Leave a message here)} 08:39, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – WP:PRIMARY says that a primary source may be used ... to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts. The date the station was opened qualifies as straightforward.
I also found several sources online that cover Xiaobailou Station: this in-depth one that describes how the station is integrated into a large belowground commercial shopping district, this one from zhwiki that says it was part of a pilot program for line transfer discounts, and these two that say the station is in the top three/four of the Tianjin Metro in terms of passenger traffic. Iiii I I I (talk) 22:07, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Add them DankPedia (talk) 02:46, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Not required per WP:NEXISTS. MarioGom (talk) 08:39, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Using an imperative sentence here that commands another editor to add sources is very disrespectful, especially when you continue to support deletion. Wikipedia:Notability#Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article explains why this argument for deletion is not policy-based. Cunard (talk) 07:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Having a shopping center doesn't make the station notable. The China Economic Times is not a RS. The other sources you gave were passing mentions or not notable. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 14:31, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Can you explain why China Economic Times is not a RS? It seems to be a proper newspaper. Jumpytoo Talk 00:27, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: WP:NTRAINSTATION says "train stations have no inherent notability and are not presumed notable for simply being train stations." I believe this applies to metro stations as well. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 21:56, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Itzcuauhtli11: That's fair. They have no inherent notability. But is this one notable? What's your assessment of existing Chinese sources? MarioGom (talk) 22:36, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was only able to find sources about the Xiaobailou Music Square and the Xiaobailou Commercial Street, served by this station. Not anything notable about the station itself (historical importance, artwork inside the station, accidents or other events in the station, etc.) — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 22:52, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: This is an invalid deletion nomination per WP:NEXISTS. MarioGom (talk) 22:35, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When doing my Wikipedia:Before I could not find any Wikipedia:RS. No such sources exist DankPedia (talk) 02:45, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Chinese sources do exist, and some have been posted above, including one from a Tianjin newspaper. The question is whether existing sources do meet notability criteria. Saying that reliable sources do not exist when it's already proven false does not help. MarioGom (talk) 16:03, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The sources do not meet WP:GNG and WP:NTRAINSTATION applies here DankPedia (talk) 03:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Iiii's first source and these two scholarly sources I found make it pass the GNG line.

Tong, Ruipeng; and Tan, Zhaoyan (2015-04-03). "A risk-based approach for crowd evacuation performance evaluation under metro fire". Georisk: Assessment and Management of Risk for Engineered Systems and Geohazards. 9 (2): 75–95. doi:10.1080/17499518.2015.1030680. ISSN 1749-9518. {{cite journal}}: |first2= missing |last2= (help); |first3= missing |last3= (help); |first4= missing |last4= (help); |first5= missing |last5= (help)CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
"城市轨道交通站点周边商业环境特征与评价——以天津市为例" (PDF). 地域研究与开发. 2014 (5): 72–76. 2014-10-01.

Jumpytoo Talk 00:48, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The first paper is about "crowd evacuation performance evaluation under metro fire". It says that for the study the Xiaobailou station was chosen for its proximity to shopping malls and Tianjin Concert Hall, high passenger flow and higher fire risk. Nothing notable about the metro station itself.

The second paper discusses commercial environments surrounding 6 different metro stations in Taijin. It's not about Xiaobailou Station itself and barely talks about it.

None of these sources contribute to the notability to the station. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 15:51, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A full independent scholarly article evaluating the stations fire safety/risks in your opinion does not contribute to SIGCOV/GNG? GNG only requires that there are multiple reliable sources providing non-trivial coverage of the station, which there are. The fact that multiple sources decided "Xiaobailou station is significant enough for me to use as the basis of my study" is the strong sign of notability that is used here. Jumpytoo Talk 16:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This station has higher fires risks than others. I don't believe that issue alone is enough to merit its own article. — Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 17:45, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded DankPedia (talk) 03:44, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article provides significant coverage about Xiaobailou station through evaluating its fire safety risks. This is encyclopedic information. There is nothing in the text of Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline to exclude sources that cover aspects of a subject that editors consider unimportant. Cunard (talk) 07:08, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the sources above found by Iiii I I I and Jumpytoo. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 21:42, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The sources found by Iiii I I I and Jumpytoo demonstrate that Xiaobailou station meets Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline. Cunard (talk) 07:08, 19 May 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.

Atul (company)

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

Fails WP:CORP and WP:GNG, no significant independent coverage in reliable sources & most important article is promotional in tone. Chronos.Zx (talk) 02:07, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Business, China, United Arab Emirates, India, Gujarat, Brazil, and United States of America. Chronos.Zx (talk) 02:07, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep -Atul is a noted company of India founded in 1947 , listed both on National Stock Exchange and Bombay Stock Exchange [1] with Stock Price of Rs 6773/-, Please do WP:BEFORE before nominating and read WP:DEL before nominating articles for deletion Jethwarp (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems that listed companies on major stock exchanges are not immediately presumed notable and still require sources to demonstrate notability (see WP:LISTED), but I would be very surprised if this one is not notable. The problem is that when I try to search for sources, the results are clogged by a huge amount of routine discussion of this company's stock price. Might count as an indicator of notability, though. Toadspike [Talk] 18:58, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The company passes both WP:CORP and WP:GNG , so the nominator rationale for deletion does not hold here. He says no significant independent coverage in reliable sources which is not true. 03:56, 13 May 2025 (UTC) Jethwarp (talk) 03:56, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
independent sources is still required per WP:CORP and WP:GNG, I conducted a WP:BEFORE search and found primarily routine financial reports like stock price updates, which do not meet WP:CORPDEPTH for significant coverage. Chronos.Zx (talk) 11:17, 13 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just would like to add that WP:CORPDEPTH argument does not hold here, there are substantial coverage in books and news media about Atul Limited. It is not a small a medium sized company , it is a large multi specialty chemicals manufacturing conglomerate which has spread its wings across the globe in these 8 decades. Also there is nothing promotional in the article, everything mentioned is a fact. The Lalbhai group are one of the most low-profile people, who hold highest esteem for their integrity, never involved in any controversy and known for their phinlantrohic activities also never seeking media attention and limelight. I have added many citations and expanded the article in last few days. Although I had removed promotional tag, it was added back without mentioning which part of article is promotion. It's current market cap is 19,995 crores, which is 199950 Millions. Jethwarp (talk) 03:36, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 04:55, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article contains substantial coverage, as I can observe. This is unequivocally a Keep. AndySailz (talk) 12:23, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Based on mentioned references in the article which is generally a reliable and independent references. Fade258 (talk) 08:39, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tianjin Fourth Central Hospital

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

Similar to the case of Tianjin University of Traditional Chinese Medicine First Affiliated Hospital, this hospital also appears to fail WP:GNG. GTrang (talk) 03:58, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture, Medicine, and China. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is no way a 95-year-old, 880-bed hospital affiliated to (possibly) the best medical university in China is not notable. I'm not going to do a proper source search just this moment, but I will provide references for my claims: [2][3]. Toadspike [Talk] 00:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.This hospital is classified as a Grade A Tertiary Hospital, which means it is one of the highest-level hospitals officially accredited by the Chinese government. It is a non-profit public institution, not commercially operated, and treats tens of thousands of patients annually. Frankly speaking, one reason I focus on writing entries about large public hospitals is to help prevent misleading commercial promotion by smaller private hospitals. The references cited are based on the most authoritative and professional data sources available regarding local healthcare conditions. Has the proposer fulfilled their responsibility in reviewing this content seriously? Have they conducted any academic searches or reviewed relevant literature? I was able to retrieve numerous academic papers through Google Scholar. Or is the proposer simply speculating based on personal unfamiliarity? Such an attitude is neither friendly nor consistent with the rigor and responsibility that this task requires.--Amazingloong (talk) 15:48, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cinder painter (talk) 06:21, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: GTrang What's your assessment of the existing Chinese sources available in Google, Google News, Google Books, for example? Any other databases you searched? --MarioGom (talk) 22:43, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Teng Lin

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

This fails WP:NACTOR. All sources are none WP:RS Ednabrenze (talk) 07:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i've add links to biographical data, the sources can only be found in his own social media livestream as short drama actors info are in general lacking online. I've included the link and even the timestamp at which he mentioned those biographical data Laiwingnang (talk) 10:07, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and China. Shellwood (talk) 11:31, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

also want to mention such info are usually hard to come by because short drama actors are not signed to any publicist or angecies..so they don't have staff to register them with movie databases, fans have to get that info from their livestreams, from social media, but fact is short vertical dramas are highly popular in china with hundreds of millions views/social media engagement and are now being seen by millions on youtube/tiktok internationally through many drama apps, they are more relevant than many mainstream actors from china. Laiwingnang (talk) 13:19, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

added a reference for his short dramas, they are listed in a WeChat application named WeTrue. It's a market data research company used by short drama industry insiders...but it is a built in app inside china's wechat and requires a wechat app installation to access the data. A link to their www feed page is added, any link on that page will give you a link to the wetrue application, upon clicking the application link will launch the data application on wechat. Laiwingnang (talk) 10:11, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Has he been profiled in any reliable sources such as newspapers or magazines? Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. I did not find significant coverage in my searches for sources. I found a passing mention here and a self-published source here. Teng Lin (Chinese: 滕林) does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria. Cunard (talk) 23:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
the industry used wechat app wetrue is a more reliable source than the ones you mentioned, it's the imdb for chinese short dramas. What you referenced are mainstream news outlet paid to write articles for agencies to hype up their stars. It's pay per play. Fact is Teng Lin is at 200k followers on china's douyin with an total of over 3 million likes and many chart topping popular short drama just in the last 12 months, many of the c-list musicians, actors who doesn't have a hit with next to no followers get to have a wikipage because their agency pumps articles about them and register them with all types of websites. China isn't America, they are not stuck in the www page age, apps like weTrue or dataeye are used by millions of drama fans and industry insiders for chart data and new releases. They are more reliable sources even if they aren't through http. They don't rely on www page that probably gets like 50 clicks. That's really an American thing. Laiwingnang (talk) 09:40, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

also want to mention, his short film trailers have millions of views on tiktok...he's not only relevant within, china, but also internationally. His recent dramas are getting subbed by kalostv, reelflicks, flicksreel and other drama apps and many are amongst the most watched short dramas internationally. Alot of activities are happening on apps , www news site gatekeeping pay per play is 2010s. Laiwingnang (talk) 09:59, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

spotify is on app, social media is on apps, netflix in on apps, in 2025, most of what the public consume is on apps, so should short drama apps like wetrue or dataeye be considered as legit sources as well Laiwingnang (talk) 10:04, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.52hrtt.com/ey/n/w/info/G1732591212530

if you want a www article, here's one...the first short drama awards and Teng Lin won one of the 3 actor awards. He's one of the top short drama actors , doesn't make him less relevant just because he doesn't have an agency to pay for written articles Laiwingnang (talk) 11:22, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

he's also on douban, china's imdb ....so googling might not show you results, but it's there

https://movie.douban.com/celebrity/1563988/movies?sortby=time&format=pic&role=A1 Laiwingnang (talk) 23:28, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

here's another stock exchange listed entertainment info company https://ir-en.maoyan.com/ that has teng lin listed https://m.maoyan.com/asgard/celebrity/3071840

so it's not true that his info isn't on the internet, it's google's algo that isn't giving search results Laiwingnang (talk) 14:26, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This 52hrtt.com link mentions Teng Lin (Chinese: 滕林) on one line. I still don't see enough "significant coverage" in reliable sources to establish notability under Wikipedia's guidelines. Cunard (talk) 17:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
https://k.sina.com.cn/article_2345992875_8bd502ab00101fg96.html

here's a sina article about him ...

This is basically another promo article paid by the film company, he refuses to talk about his person life and family and he is not signed to any agency, so these types of promo articles only mention him because he's involved in their projects. Laiwingnang (talk) 21:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a good find. I didn't find any evidence that the article was paid for by the film company. If it was paid for by the film company, then it wouldn't be considered an independent source so would not contribute to establishing notability. I agree that the article has limited biographical coverage about him as it's focused primarily on his appearance in the short drama and how netizens responded to that. Are there any other reliable sources like this that discuss him? Cunard (talk) 05:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
here's an article that mentioned another of him and his drama topping the charts...but not focused on him

https://www.toutiao.com/article/7458155280858923571/?wid=1747493850370

he's an article that mentioned many of his dramas and is full of pictures of him, but only mention his roles, but not the actor's name

https://k.sina.com.cn/article_5953466483_162dab07301901ce3q.html?from=ent&subch=oent

here's one where his female costar was interviewed and there's a mention of him, but as he doesn't do interviews and doesn't have an agent to force him to do publicity work. it's really hard to get any articles about him specifically and even when they write an article about him like in the article i provided earlier, he did not participate

https://news.sina.cn/gn/2025-01-26/detail-inehhkse0672369.d.html?from=wap Laiwingnang (talk) 16:08, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for providing these sources. I agree with your assessment that the first and third sources provide passing mentions of him, while the second source mentions only his role but not his name. Cunard (talk) 08:07, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 19:20, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 01:31, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete since it does not look like much coverage to establish a stand alone page. Lacks clear notability imo. Ramos1990 (talk) 01:43, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong related deletions

Sleek Flow

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

Article is about a startup that fails to meet the relevant notability guidelines (WP:NCORP). There aren't sources that discusses the subject in depth, and the sources are mostly sponsored, routine announcements of raisings etc..., and talk about the founder other than the business itself. Also note that this source, while it meets WP:SIGCOV, it might also be sponsored by the way. ToadetteEdit (7M articles) 15:39, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Hong Kong. Shellwood (talk) 15:50, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Sources fail WP:ORGCRIT, including the one listed in Hotelier which is unbylined and likely churnalism or sponsored. --CNMall41 (talk) 17:31, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 23:25, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Although the company is not very old, but it has garnered significant press in several reputable sources. Complies with WP:NCORP. SailabK (talk) 03:50, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Lonsdale (entrepreneur)

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

Only 1 article links to this. Seems rather promotional. Marked for COI concerns noting edits from this editor. Fails WP:BIO. LibStar (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, China, Hong Kong, and New Zealand. LibStar (talk) 06:05, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per NOM. Appears promotional, with little to justify an article. Even with the terribly low bar for WP:GNG, this article appears to fail. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 06:54, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Businesspeople, and Psychology. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 07:01, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies

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

Article is about a private academic/educational organization. There are only 3 sources: and all 3 are from the organization's own website.

Hence, no independent sources, therefore fails the WP:V and WP:Notability requirements.

Log says that an article of the same name was deleted in the past, but I cannot find that older AfD. Noleander (talk) 13:11, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a well-known independent institution in Hong Kong. Multiple local news agencies have reported findings of such institute which they are well cited.

https://news.mingpao.com/pns/%E6%B8%AF%E8%81%9E/article/20250328/s00002/1743099198748/%E4%B8%AD%E5%A4%A7%E4%BA%9E%E5%A4%AA%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80%E6%B0%91%E8%AA%BF-63-%E6%8C%87%E7%8F%BE%E9%9D%9E%E8%B2%B7%E6%A8%93%E6%99%82%E6%A9%9F-42-%E6%96%99%E4%BE%86%E5%B9%B4%E8%B7%8C%E5%83%B9

https://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20241111/mobile/bkn-20241111134821159-1111_00822_001.html

https://www.inmediahk.net/node/%E6%94%BF%E7%B6%93/%E3%80%90%E8%B2%A1%E6%94%BF%E9%A0%90%E7%AE%97%E6%A1%88%E3%80%91%E4%B8%AD%E5%A4%A7%E6%B0%91%E8%AA%BF%EF%BC%9A%E4%BA%94%E6%88%90%E5%8D%8A%E5%B8%82%E6%B0%91%E6%84%9F%E4%B8%8D%E6%BB%BF-%E6%BB%BF%E6%84%8F%E5%83%858%EF%BC%85

Articles from secondary sources on this institute include

https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E4%BA%9A%E5%A4%AA%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80/7260339

https://onthinktanks.org/think-tank/%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E4%BA%9E%E5%A4%AA%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80/

Please let me know if you are unsatisfied with what I have provided and would like more or something else, thank you. Ilovefood123123 (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The first three sources cite the organization's work without anything about the organization itself. The Baidu Baike entry is another online encyclopedia, and onthinktanks.org is a directory listing with content likely provided by the organization. Oblivy (talk) 23:07, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cunard Hi there I’m not sure if you would have the time of doing so but could you please take a look and see if you could try finding related sources to this article, since you have similarly done so in the past. Thank you very much. Ilovefood123123 (talk) 12:21, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Hong Kong. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:57, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This institute has been cited hundreds of times on Jstor. [4] Their polls are regularly covered in the news, e.g. SCMP: [5][6][7], NYT: [8][9][10][11]. They are also called variations like "the Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies at Chinese University" or "Hong Kong Institute of Asia Pacific Studies" (no hyphen) or the abbreviated "HKIAPS". I haven't found sigcov yet but I am not sure if meeting the GNG is required here; similar to our standards for academics and newspapers, I think the bar should be lower here. Toadspike [Talk] 07:22, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Btw, the previous deletion was a speedy under WP:A7 from 15 years ago. [12] There was no AfD and that speedy deletion, being a content issue and not a notability issue, should have no bearing on the outcome of this discussion. Toadspike [Talk] 13:40, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hope for Hong Kong

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

Page for a defunct centrist faction of the Hong Kong Liberal party. Four citations all to local news that stops with the collapse of this group. Considering they were a minor faction that never really accomplished anything and then folded its unlikely there will be more coverage in the future which means four local newspaper articles is likely what we've got. Lacking WP:SIGCOV I'd say delete it. Simonm223 (talk) 13:40, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Hong Kong. Shellwood (talk) 14:01, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I think it is clear that the party did fulfil GNG/NORG with those sources and this AFD seems to focus more on whether it deserves a standalone article. The article currently includes four sources from the Hong Kong Economic Times and HK01, both of which are credible media outlets and generally reliable sources on zhwiki (see WP:HKRS#HKET and WP:HKRS#HK01), rather than some small-scale local tabloids. The coverage in this HKET article[13] and this HK01 article[14] appear to be adequately significant to me. The corresponding article on zhwiki also includes a few sources from Initium Media and Citizen News, and I found more news coverage during the party's operational period, such as a Ming Pao article about legal scholar Jack Lee [zh] announcing his decision to join the party.[15] There are also some commentaries on this party, like an Initium Media article thoroughly analyzing whether this party's centrist stance has any chance of survival in Hong Kong,[16] as well as opinion pieces from Ta Kung Pao and Orange News discussing potential reasons for founder James Tien to establish the party and his future political agenda.[17][18] I personally do not believe being defunct or a party's achievements are relevant to notability, especially since the founding members are all notable politicians (James Tien, Selina Chow, Miriam Lau, Felix Chung, Lam Man-kit [zh]), not just random people forming a joke party or something. The nom is absolutely right that there has been a significant drop in media coverage about this party after its closure. But the coverage we got is more than sufficient for a GNG pass, and Wikipedia also records history, so a notable political party, even if it no longer exists, is still worth documenting. —👑PRINCE of EREBOR📜 15:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
From the sources I think it's actually incorrect to call it a party - it was formed as a corporation to circumvent normal party formation requirements. However I still think the absence of any coverage outside of HK and the fact that it didn't have WP:LASTING coverage override the bare presence of a few sources. Simonm223 (talk) 15:46, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:LASTING applies only to events, not defunct organizations. I also do not see any issues with notability merely because the coverage is local. Sources with a regional audience can still serve as strong evidence of notability per WP:AUD. The media outlets listed above, like HKET or HK01 or Initium, are among the most credible sources in Hong Kong. I think it is entirely reasonable for a local organization to operate solely within its region and exert local influence. It does not need to expand its influence to a global level or be reported by English-language sources to be considered notable (non-English sources are perfectly acceptable per WP:NONENG). Otherwise, it would promote an Anglo-centric bias on Wikipedia by rejecting subjects that have not received international or English-language coverage. —👑PRINCE of EREBOR📜 16:33, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would at least expect SCMP or similar to mention it if this group had even regional significance. Like we're not talking about press coverage limited to one country or to one province. We're talking about press coverage limited to one city. Simonm223 (talk) 17:04, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the term "regional" in WP:AUD (which is pipe-linked to Newspaper#Local or regional: A local newspaper serves a region such as a city, or part of a large city) is perfect for the case of Hong Kong, and I do not really understand the logic here: SCMP is still a local newspaper and should be dismissed if you are expecting coverage outside of Hong Kong specifically. I do not see a significant difference between SCMP and the Hong Kong Economic Times or Ming Pao aside from one being in English and the others in Chinese, which brings me back to my point about WP:NONENG. —👑PRINCE of EREBOR📜 17:19, 15 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Prince of Erebor's sources have shown that Hope for Hong Kong (traditional Chinese: 希望聯盟; simplified Chinese: 希望联盟) meets Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria. I agree with Prince of Erebor's comments in response to the nominator. Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Audience says, "Significant coverage in media with an international, national, or at least regional audience (e.g., the biggest daily newspaper in any US state) is a strong indication of notability." The Hong Kong Economic Times and HK01 are major regional publications, so the audience requirement is met. There is no requirement for there to be sources outside of Hong Kong or for the South China Morning Post to cover it. This political party is not an event, so there is no requirement for it to pass Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Lasting effects. Cunard (talk) 08:38, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ho Yi

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

Little established notability; sparse amount of sources available online or offline while article used to have iMDb as most sources. Subject edited own article, which has not been properly maintained to denote his significance and notability to be kept as an article. MimirIsSmart (talk) 06:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Hong Kong. MimirIsSmart (talk) 06:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Ng, Hung 吳雄 (2015-07-14). "中學念本地左校黃浩義香港經歷文革" [Attended Local Leftist School in Secondary School: Wong Ho-yee Experienced Cultural Revolution in Hong Kong]. Hong Kong Economic Journal (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-05-04. Retrieved 2025-05-04.
  The article notes: "香港「舞台劇之父」黃浩義長居上海，偶而回港為這片鄉土澆上一瓢清泉，其中一瓢是2013年8月拍成的電影《紅色的迴廊》（Red Passage）。奈何劇本早在2009年已寫好，先遇上資金、取景的困難，後遇上政治熱帶氣旋帶來的狂風暴雨，至今未有發行商願意放映。 ... 片中男主角從官校轉到左校，他就是黃浩義本人。... 結果，黃浩義去另一地方拍英國旗再把畫面合併。雖然拍攝在暑假進行，但傳媒竟找上門拜訪他。... 政治改變思想，思想改變命運，黃浩義中三就轉校，開涼茶舖的父親總算及時轉軚，才有了今天的舞台劇之父。"
  From Google Translate: "Hong Kong's 'Father of Stage Play' Wong Ho Yi has lived in Shanghai for a long time. He occasionally returns to Hong Kong to bring some fresh air to his hometown. One of his contributions was the movie 'Red Passage' which was made in August 2013. Unfortunately, the script was written as early as 2009, but it first encountered difficulties in funding and location selection, and then encountered the storm brought by the political tropical cyclone. So far, no distributor is willing to screen it. ... The protagonist in the film transferred from the official school to the left school, and he was Wong Ho Yi himself. ... As a result, Wong Ho Yi went to another place to take pictures of the British flag and then merged the images. Although the filming took place during the summer vacation, the media came to visit him. ... Politics changes thoughts, thoughts change destiny. Wong Ho Yi changed schools in Form 3, and his father, who ran a herbal tea shop, finally changed his mind in time, and he became the father of stage plays today."
2. Dong, Jin 董進 (2013-04-28). "香港舞台劇之父開創無厘頭風格后被周星馳借鑒" [Father of Hong Kong Stage Drama Pioneered Absurdist Style, Later Borrowed by Stephen Chow]. Chongqing Morning Post (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2016-11-10. Retrieved 2025-05-04 – via People's Daily.
  The article notes: "黃浩義1983年在港創辦香港青年劇團，成為第一代專業搞戲劇的。... 作為導演，黃浩義執導了不少優秀的舞台劇，而作為演員，黃浩義除了參演眾多港台劇，還在多部好萊塢電影中擔任角色，與布拉德·彼特(《間諜游戲》)、皮爾斯·布魯斯南（《007之擇日而亡》）都對過戲。聊起在好萊塢拍戲經歷，黃浩義很有感觸。"
  From Google Translate: "Wong founded the Hong Kong Youth Theater Company in Hong Kong in 1983, becoming the first generation of professional theater practitioners. ... As a director, Wong has directed many outstanding stage plays, and as an actor, Wong has appeared in many Hong Kong and Taiwan dramas, and has also played roles in several Hollywood films, starring with Brad Pitt ("Spy Game") and Pierce Brosnan ("007's Death"). When he talked about his experience of filming in Hollywood, Wong was very touched."
3. Sek, Kei 石琪 (2019-11-17). "粗口和紅色迴廊" [Profanity and the Red Corridor]. Ming Pao (in Chinese). p. S5.
  The article notes: "大家於是提及香港劇場，卅多年前最早把粗口引進「大雅之堂」，開路先鋒是黃浩義，一九八六年把美國著名粗口劇《美國水牛》翻譯演出，改名《鉤心鬥角》，台上猛講粵語粗口，大受青年學生歡迎，紛紛起哄，創下場場數特多的紀錄。... 黃浩義在香港劇壇的創舉不少，移居英國及上海也在演藝界創造一些先例。其實二○一四年他自編自導了一部很特別的香港獨立片《紅色的迴廊》，以他本身的少年經歷，描述七十年代初一個男生，因父親愛國，送他入香港左派中學，該校追隨大陸文革作風，念《毛語錄》，忠字舞，批批跳鬥，很「恐怖」。"
  From Google Translate: "Everyone then mentioned Hong Kong theatre, which was the first to introduce swear words into the "classical arena" more than 30 years ago. The pioneer was Wong Ho Yi, who translated and performed the famous American swear play "American Buffalo" in 1986, renamed it "Intrigue", and used Cantonese swear words on stage, which was very popular among young students. They all cheered and set a record for the number of performances. ... Wong Hoyi has made many innovations in the Hong Kong theatre scene, and his move to the UK and Shanghai also created some precedents in the entertainment industry. In fact, in 2014, he wrote and directed a very special Hong Kong independent film "Red Corridor", which was based on his own teenage experience and described a boy in the early 1970s who was sent to a leftist middle school in Hong Kong because of his patriotic father. The school followed the style of the Cultural Revolution in mainland China, reading "Quotations from Chairman Mao", doing the loyalty dance, and dancing criticisms. It was very "scary"."
4. Sek, Kei 石琪 (2014-11-15). "入讀左校的日子" [The Days of Enrolling in the Leftist School]. Ming Pao (in Chinese). p. D5.
  The article notes: "在「香港亞洲影展」看了黃浩義自編自導自製新片《紅色的迴廊》。黃浩義是本港資深話劇人，最具爭議性是廿多年前自導自演《勾心鬥角》，即美國著名粗口劇《美國水牛》的粵語版，大講粵語粗口，多次重演都滿座，成為本港舞台爆粗的先驅。隨後他的獨立電影《雷雨》改編曹禺名劇，涉及性問題也有爭議，但票房失利。"
  From Google Translate: "I watched the new film "Red Corridor" written, directed and produced by Wong Hoyi at the "Hong Kong Asian Film Festival". Wong Hoyi is a senior dramatist in Hong Kong. His most controversial work is "Intrigue" which he directed and starred in more than 20 years ago. It is the Cantonese version of the famous American foul-mouthed play "American Buffalo". He used a lot of Cantonese foul language and the theaters were always full during many re-performances, making him a pioneer of swearing on the Hong Kong stage. His subsequent independent film Thunderstorm, adapted from Cao Yu's famous play, also controversially dealt with sexual issues, but failed at the box office."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Wong Ho Yi (traditional Chinese: 黃浩義; simplified Chinese: 黄浩义) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 07:17, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The policies say that articles containing flaws should not be deleted if they can be improved. Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion says, If editing can address all relevant reasons for deletion, this should be done rather than deleting the page. Wikipedia:Editing policy#Wikipedia is a work in progress: perfection is not required says, Perfection is not required: Wikipedia is a work in progress. Collaborative editing means that incomplete or poorly written first drafts can evolve over time into excellent articles. Even poor articles, if they can be improved, are welcome. Cunard (talk) 07:17, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – robertsky (talk) 14:42, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: per sources provided by Cunard; hopefully these references can be placed in the article during or following the discussion as right now there are still quite a few unreferenced passages. -- Recon rabbit 17:54, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Taiwan related deletions