Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tse Chi-yung (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 of the debate was DELETE, although I am reluctant to act on a subject-led request like this with the Foundation's say-so. -Splash^talk 17:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tse Chi-yung[edit]

I wonder why this survived the first VfD. No sign of notability. Btw, I am the person being described in this article. cytse 16:22, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Clearly not vanity, since it is the subject of the article who has nominated the deletion. Deletion because of humility? ;-) Bucketsofg 16:35, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Wow. This has got be a precedent. Going neutral. --Fuhghettaboutit 17:00, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

~~Neutral~~ If this were nominated by anyone else I would probably vote keep. It is verifiable and the subject is at least slightly notable. That being said, if the nom really is the subject of the article and he does want it deleted I would go along with that being enough of a reason barring more notability. kotepho 18:51, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I have no reason to believe it is not him. I must forget those cow problems. kotepho 05:17, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I think you're just being modest ;-) --Joey Roe 20:49, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. --Metropolitan90 00:41, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I know cytse in person. It was 2 years ago when I was bored and set up a site like this with a friend. I would consider him a great person, but not to the extent that it should warrant a wikipedia entry. I thought it would be deleted soon, but to our surprise it was edited on... Apologies for my naiveness back then. As for deletion initiated by the person himself, I think it would be unfair to him that this wikipedia entry would be all over the place when somebody searches him on Google. Sydneyfong 04:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I understand the nominator/subject's position, but... Weak keep as somewhat notable. The subject or the author don't WP:OWN the article, so their contributions to this AfD should not be treated in any special way. Sandstein 09:11, 1 April 2006 (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.