Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shiu Sin-por

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 keep. Nja²⁴⁷ 19:33, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shiu Sin-por

Speedy declined. No indication of notability to meet guidelines and no substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. (Was still in school in 2007) ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:17, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:59, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Does not seem to pass notability requirements under WP:PROF, but news coverage indicates notability under WP:BIO.--Eric Yurken (talk) 16:55, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There's an announcement of his appointment to a non-notable positiong and some quotes from him in articles on other subjects. I'm not seeing any substantial coverage in independent reliable sources. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:51, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Upon searching news archives, I actually think that the "Central Policy Unit" is highly notable, see: [1]. It seems to be an influential think-tank in Hong Kong. This article: [2], although not public access, is written in detail about the Central Policy Unit. Cazort (talk) 00:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:04, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep As I argued above, I think this article: [3] qualifies as fairly detailed coverage supporting notability. Also, numerous quotes in international press, including TIME, the New York Times, BusinessWeek, and many more international papers, often in association with the think-tank One Country Two Systems Research Institute (which does not have a wikipedia page, but also has strong evidence of notability: [4]). This source: [5] also connects him to the "New Hong Kong Alliance", and this book: [6] mentions him in a government position. He is also referenced a number of times in more scholarly literature, such as: [7], and [8] which attributes a specific argument to him, originating in an article he authored: Shiu Sin-Por, ‘Victims the Losers in Court Decision’, South China Morning Post (Hong Kong), 28 November 2000, 16, There's a wealth of information on this guy...yes, it's in little tidbits and would be challenging to weave together into a rich, tightly sourced article, but it is WAAAY above the threshold for notability for me. Cazort (talk) 00:56, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on the above information. It would have been good to have had some of it in the initial article. It would also have been good for it to be checked before nominating. But the nice comment made about him at his appointment, in news.gov.hk -- the first ref added above--is somewhat in the class of press releases. Cazort, I assume you take responsibility for completing the article properly? DGG (talk) 04:44, 27 April 2009 (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.