Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meng Zhaoguo incident

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 merge to UFO sightings in China. (non-admin closure) czar · · 18:22, 15 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Meng Zhaoguo incident[edit]

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

Non-notable reported close encounter of the seventh kind. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 10:03, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is evidence of the incident meeting WP:GNG. (a book, Time magazine). No prejudice against merge suggestions. -- cyclopia^speak! 11:41, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:09, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:09, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:09, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Merge to UFO sightings in China. It's attracted international interest: the above plus[1][2][3]. --Colapeninsula (talk) 16:36, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Poke - had a re-write with sources. Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 20:52, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to UFO sightings in China in agreement with Colapeninsula. The independent references provide sufficient notability for the incident for inclusion. However, a condensed version of this article could extend the current single sentence on the incident in the section on UFO sightings in China in 1994. Kooky2 (talk) 22:50, 8 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
(Procedural) accept merge as appropriate; however I won't withdraw the nomination, as that would close this nomination without opening a merge nomination. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 23:39, 8 July 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.