Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Debbie Wong (2nd nomination)

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. Deleted as unsourced BLP. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 00:49, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Debbie Wong

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

I was actually PRODing this until I noticed the first AfD and it's certainly time for a new one since November 2005. My original PROD: "Nothing to currently suggest fully satisfying model notability guidelines and the best my searches found were only a few trivial local news.". Notifying the only still active past AfDers Yamaguchi先生 and Herostratus. SwisterTwister talk 20:21, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 20:22, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 20:22, 11 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's an insufficiently sourced WP:BLP so I think can and should be deleted on that basis alone... actually it can, should, and basically must be PROD'd on that basis alone, if I remember the rule properly. However, it appears that there may have been other sources in earlier versions. I've not the interest to look for them though. As to her merits above and beyond the lack of sources, I guess she might be borderline notable... IMO we have to have to keep in mind that lack of stature in the English-speaking world is not indicative of lack of stature generally... she's possibly borderline notable in the far east. I'd keep it if the question was strictly notability. But the lack of sources requires a deletion here. Article can be re-created anytime anyone has the motivation to get some sources. Herostratus (talk) 02:14, 12 December 2015 (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.