Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr Michael Wong

Dr Michael Wong

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

NOT NEWS.-- and Promotional, for both the person, and a cause. Whether an adequate article could be written about the academic career under WP:PROF is uncertain--I would normally rewriter to see, but I am not comfortable discarding the bulk of the article rather than deleting it. DGG ( talk ) 01:10, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Even if this person turns out to be notable, there is nothing in the current article that would be worth salvaging... --Randykitty (talk) 12:26, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article is plagued with peacock language.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:43, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Melbourne. This level of violence towards the Public hospital doctor is a big community concern here in Australia. This is appropriate news information content for Wilkepaedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.250.5.251 (talk) 02:46, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:11, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:11, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:11, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:11, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. WP:BLP1E. Xxanthippe (talk) 00:16, 25 April 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS. The article is primarily about the stabbing event and it's too soon to tell whether that will have the lasting notability needed to make this an encyclopedic subject and not just a news subject. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:04, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I work in the health sector in Melbourne Australia and am new to contributing in Wikipedia. I am surprised to see the above comments on the lack newsworthiness on Dr Wong's story and the suggestions of deletion. Dr Wong's attack has raised concerns on the safety of health workers in Australia. On a larger scale, this story has also highlighted the increasing level of violence in our community. Currently there is no specific security measure for the majority of health workers in Australia. It is therefore of great interest to all health workers and the larger community the outcome of this attacker's court proceedings and the potential response from the government, as well as Dr Wong's view on the attack and his recovery. I do not know Dr Wong personally and thus have sought information on his story in Wikipedia. I thank the contributors for the information on Dr Wong's Wikipedia entry. It is an important story for thousands of health workers in Melbourne, if not around the world. I can easily find extensive Wikipedia entries on celebrities or entertainers. If these celebrity entries were considered far more important than Dr Wong's story, I am afraid Wikipedia will end up being no more than a second-rated tabloid. MichelleDG