Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jackson Ng

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. Doczilla _{@SUPERHEROLOGIST} 00:22, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jackson Ng[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

WP:BLP of a political figure, not reliably sourced as having a strong claim to passing WP:NPOL. The notability claims here are serving on a local council and standing as a non-winning candidate for election to parliament -- but neither local councillors nor unelected legislative candidates get Wikipedia articles on that basis per se, and must show either that they had preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten them into Wikipedia anyway, or that they can be credibly considered to be markedly more notable than most other local councillors or non-winning parliamentary candidates in some way that would pass the ten year test for enduring significance.
But the majority of the footnotes here are primary sourcing that isn't support for notability at all (e.g. the self-published websites of directly affiliated organizations, his own "staff" profiles on the websites of the council and his own day-job employer, raw tables of results from the elections he didn't win), and what little there is for media coverage consists almost entirely of listicles covering multiple people, e.g. all the candidates in the elections he ran in, thus not establishing a reason to deem him as more notable than all the other people covered by the same articles.
There's just nothing "inherently" notable about any of this, and the sourcing isn't solid enough to claim that he passes WP:GNG in lieu of having to pass NPOL. Bearcat (talk) 21:30, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and United Kingdom. Bearcat (talk) 21:30, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have researched - seems to be many articles on Jackson Ng. Has a Chinese wikipedia article on him as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.169.26.4 (talk) 11:43, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

His notability is not necessarily established by just any web page you can find that happens to have his name in it. He has to be the subject of a source, not just a person whose words get quoted in an article whose subject is something or somebody else, for that source to help establish his notability — but the overwhelming majority of the new sources you've added to the article are the latter, not the former, and the only source you've added in which Jackson Ng is the subject is a Q&A interview in which he's talking about himself in the first person from a WordPress blog, which is not a notability-clinching source either. Bearcat (talk) 21:20, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:29, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would appear to have a long standing wikipedia entry in Chinese which is referenced in this entry. Plenty of articles / meedia in chinese on the figure. 218.255.89.9 (talk) 06:12, 11 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to have quite a lot of media mentions / quotes but perhaps entry does not need to be as long / detailed. 61.239.79.161 (talk) 15:09, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:11, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment fails NPOL by the looks of it. A possible (albeit weak) case for WP:GNG.-KH-1 (talk) 02:41, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 19:44, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, appears to meet general notability. Andrevan@ 19:48, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Meets general notability on what grounds? GNG is not "count up the footnotes and keep anybody who surpasses an arbitrary number" — GNG tests sources for their depth and the context of what they're covering the person for, and as I noted above the sources here are almost entirely glancing namechecks of his existence in coverage about other things or people, with the only source that's actually about him being a Q&A interview on an unreliable blog. Bearcat (talk) 15:51, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'm not convinced by arguments on him having a zhwiki page, because notability requirements differ from one Wikimedia project to another. I did a sample of sources from the page, and I do not believe that what I read makes him notable. SWinxy (talk) 21:27, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bearcat and SWinxy. Falls short of meeting WP:NPOL and WP:GNG guidelines. Sal2100 (talk) 17:59, 30 July 2022 (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.