Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angie Chang
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:31, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Angie Chang (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable per WP:BIO. The sources in the article appear to be mostly blogs, and browsing around on Google didn't turn up much else. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:15, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, fails WP:BIO & WP:GNG. Article clearly falls under WP:NOTADVERTISING. No significant coverage of the subject from secondary or tertiary reliable sources.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 18:15, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. LlamaAl (talk) 02:10, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:03, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TBrandley (what's up) 00:16, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 09:28, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No evidence of any independent coverage from sources with reputations for being reliable. Nyttend (talk) 02:31, 1 March 2013 (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.