Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amy Chang

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 delete. I feel there is consensus that this individual isn't notable on her own, but I'd have no concerns about restoring to user/draft space if someone wishes to write an article about the parents and their arrest. ansh 666 08:05, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Amy Chang[edit]

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

Chang's parents were arrested in China. Every source relates to their arrest. Chang is not notable outside her incidental involvement with that incident. A clear case of WP:BLP1E (and WP:COATRACK since this article seems to be about the parent's case). World's Lamest Critic (talk) 21:12, 6 December 2017 (UTC) World's Lamest Critic (talk) 21:12, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. The parents' case might be notable, but that doesn't make her notable. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:14, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- I created this article, after she sat down and had a long interview with Rosemary Barton on the CBC's Power and Politics, in May. Barton interviewed Chang after other news agencies reported on her most recent trip to Ottawa to meet with senior politicians. power~enwiki wrote "The parents' case might be notable, but that doesn't make her notable." Being related to high-profile prisoners does not make Chang notable, because notability is not inherited. What makes this young woman notable is that the press coverage of her attempts to lobby the Trudeau government, on her parent's behalf, measures up to the criteria of GNG.
Ms Chang made new visits to Ottawa just recently, and the CBC broadcast a new sound-bite of her just last night. Geo Swan (talk) 21:43, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment just within the last two days both the Vancouver Sun and CTV News explicitly mentioned Ms Chang in the headlines of articles that profiled her. Geo Swan (talk) 22:06, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
1. Richmond woman with parents jailed in China urges Canada to halt trade talks
2. B.C. woman urges Trudeau to help free parents detained in China

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:30, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 22:30, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In June The Globe and Mail reported:

"Their daughter, Amy Chang, who has been on a vigil in Ottawa hoping to meet Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, had an hour long-meeting with Ms. Freeland on Thursday."

Foreign Affairs Minister Freeland is a senior minister. An hour? That is a very long meeting. She could have had a five minute meeting scheduled, shake hands, "very sorry; doing everything we can; we'll keep you posted; goodbye" An hour meeting strongly implies Ms Chang's concerns were taken very seriously. She already met Parliamentary Secretaries, and the leaders of our two opposition parties. Ms Chang's efforts to lobby on her parent's behalf have been very effective. They have been followed by the press in detail well above that required for her to measure up to GNG. Geo Swan (talk) 22:57, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Following are additional articles that explicitly mention Ms Chang in the article title. The nomination incorrectly claims that "Every source relates" to the parent's arrest, and that Ms Chang's involvement has been "incidental".
Clearly, if her involvement had truly been incidental, and she had received only passing mention in articles about her parents, then no article would be explicitly referring to her in the article title. Geo Swan (talk) 23:32, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Daughter of Canadians detained in China ‘hopeful’ for meeting with PM
Daughter of B.C. wine merchants facing Chinese trial makes plea to Trudeau
Daughter of winery owners jailed in China seeking Trudeau's help
Daughter of B.C. winery owner jailed in China seeking Ottawa's help
Richmond winemaker faces closed-door trial in China; daughter urges Trudeau to intervene

Perhaps we have different understandings of what "incidental" means. These headlines aren't because she is of interest, but because she is the daughter of the jailed couple. She is only being interviewed because she is related to them and acting as a spokesperson for them. World's Lamest Critic (talk) 23:55, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment as apparently my earlier statement wasn't sufficient. The only coverage presented by anyone is of her acting as an advocate for her parents who have been detained in China. An article on the event of her parents' detention would be a reasonable topic for an article based on those stories. An article on Amy Chang is not reasonable; this is an obvious case of WP:BLP1E. I find none of Geo Swan's arguments here or on my talk page to be convincing. power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:41, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- First, thanks for returning here to try to clarify your position.
- As to your feeling Amy Chang coverage of Ms Chang is an instance of BLP1e... Can I remind you of the three criteria that section says all have to be met for an individual to be considered a BLP1e? I don't believe any of the criteria are met:

blp1e says	my comments
If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event.	In May Chang met with the leaders of both opposition parties. I don't know where you life, but that is a big deal. In May Chang met with several Parliamentary Secretaries. Every senior minister has another MP who serves as their Parliamentary Secretary. So, while not as significant as meeting with the actual minister, this is significant. In June Chang met with Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland. Foreign Minister is one of the most senior positions in the Cabinet. And Freeland spend a full hour with her. In November new clips of Chang appeared on the nightly news. Among other things those clips said Chang was still trying to meet with Prime Minister Trudeau. In my opinion these are best regarded as separate events.
If that person otherwise remains, and is likely to remain, a low-profile individual.	As above those were all significant events, that earned Chang brand new coverage. So I don't see how she can be described as a "low-profile individual.
If the event is not significant or the individual's role was either not substantial or not well documented.	Hasn't Chang's role in these events been well documented? I'd appreciate an explanation as to why PEW does not recognize meetings with a senior Minster and the Leader of the Opposition should not be described as "substantial".

PEW, perhaps implied by your comment is the idea that any relative would lobby for a beloved relative, imprisoned in a foreign land -- so her efforts can't be significant. Chang is far from the only Canadian to have a beloved relative imprisoned under questionable circumstances. No one has started articles on those other individuals because their lobbying efforts were much less effective than Chang's, and they did not receive significant, on-going press coverage.
I followed fellow wikipedian Joshua Boyle's kidnapping and captivity, since it was first reported in 2012. No one considered starting articles on his relatives. Their lobbying efforts were not effective enough to merit the same kind of coverage as Chang's. Heck, their lobbying efforts were so ineffective that the article on Boyle wasn't started for four years.
If I have understood your position, I think you are looking at the wrong thing. Every captive with people who love them is likely to have them try to support them. That doesn't make Chang significant. What has made Chang's efforts significant, notable, when Boyle's relatives weren't, was that her efforts were successful in ways Boyle's relatives' efforts weren't. The measure of how successful those efforts were is that she received a level of coverage, ongoing coverage, Boyle's relatives did not receive. Geo Swan (talk) 03:36, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:13, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

_Speedy Delete- no notability. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 16:07, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Move to Abduction (or arrest?) of John Chang and Allison Lu. (Is that an allowable vote? It's been a while. If not, I guess my money's on Delete.) I feel like this BLP1E issue could go either way. Is she famous because of one event since the only reason she seems to do press is to talk about the abduction of her parents? Or is she independently notable because she, herself, goes around giving interviews about the event that are themselves (at least arguably) notable? To me, it's more like the first than the second. She wouldn't be famous if it weren't for her parents and the press coverage just all seems to flow out of the original event. I'd slightly reorganize the article, move it to something like the title I suggested, and use a redirect. YMMV. AgnosticAphid talk 01:02, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Agnosticaphid, you wrote: "(1) Is she famous because of one event since the only reason she seems to do press is to talk about the abduction of her parents? (2) Or is she independently notable because she, herself, goes around giving interviews about the event that are themselves (at least arguably) notable?"
1. Fame is not the same as wikipedia notability. We rely on the judgement of professional reporters, professional journalists, professional editors, as to what is notable. I think the wikipedia's rules are pretty clear, our notability decisions should not be based on the judgement of whether wikipedia contributors think an individual should receive press coverage, but rather on whether she actually received meaningful press coverage.
2. Amy Chang didn't just sit down for inteviews with journalists, she was able to have long, substantive meetings with Leader of the Opposition, and the Foreign Affairs Minister. Her Chrystia Freeland lasted an hour. None of the relatives of former wikipedian Joshua Boyle, who was a captive of the Taliban for five years, were able to meet with the Foreign Affairs Minister, or with any MP. Journalists want to interview her because her efforts to meet with and lobby the Government have proven so remarkably effective.
  Note, when journalists have interviewed Chang they haven't confined themselves to her efforts to lobby the government. They also asked her to describe her experiences leaving China. Chang was in China herself, when her parents were arrested, in Shanghai. An uncle phoned her, informed her of their arrest, and advised her to go immediately to the airport, and get the next flight out of China. In the three CBC interviews I listened to she described her fear that her plane might be ordered to return to China, so she too could be arrested, and she didn't feel safe until she landed in Canada. That's clearly about her, not her parents.
3. WRT your suggestion that the article on Amy Chang be renamed something like Arrest and conviction of John Chang and Allison Liu... Prior to his arrest John Chang had already been part of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's entourage on multiple trade expeditions to China, and he had allowed his business's Beijing offices to be repurposed and host Canadian athletes, during the Beijing Olympics. Although we didn't have an article about him, prior to his arrest, he was arguably notable, prior to his arrest. Add the notability factors, prior to his arrest, to the notability of his surprise arrest, show trial, and health concerns in detention, is there any doubt he merits his own standalone article? The Harper connection and Olympic connection don't belong in an article on the arrest and conviction. Geo Swan (talk) 13:12, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. None of the sources employed in the article arise out of (or establish) this woman's independent notability as a topic. The issue being covered by those sources is clearly the arrest of her parents; this seems like a pretty clear (if not necessarily intentional) WP:COATRACK to discuss the issue of the arrest and detention of her parents--which incident may or may not qualify for its own article--I lean towards the presumption that it probably does, but can't say for certain on those sources reviewed for the purposes of this discussion. Snow ^{let's rap} 01:49, 19 December 2017 (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.