Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2017 May 9

Duncan Pescod – Copyright violations are never restored. —Cryptic 14:22, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the page above. Please do not modify it.

Deletion Article was speedily deleted by user:SouthernNights under criterion WP:A7: No credible indication of importance (individuals, animals, organizations, web content, events). The original speedy deletion tag added by user:Chrissymad did not cite criterion A7. I exchanged a couple of messages with Chrissymad before the page was deleted, then spoke to SouthernNights who directed me here (see user talk:SouthernNights#Speedy deletion of Duncan Pescod).

Evidence for notability

This man is running a highly controversial semi-independent government agency in a city-state of 8 million people with HK$21.6B budget.

His appointment to the Authority was covered in the media, in a move seen as entrenching of pro-establishment interests in a highly visible and increasingly embarrassing project, as was his promotion to chief of the Authority.

While he was Director of Housing, he was involved in a scandal in which public officials (incl the Chief Executive) were found to have illegal built structures on their properties.

He was the most senior non-Chinese civil servant when he was working directly for the government.

He has an entry on Chinese wikipedia—zh:栢志高.

Press highlights: Pescod takes the WKCD underground (2016), Pescod elevated to top post at West Kowloon agency (2015), Wrong man for the job? Artists express fears over appointment of new West Kowloon CEO (2015), Illegal structures found at housing chief's property (2012). Please note that I am only including English written media.

Further argument Providing information about prominent public officials is one of Wikipedia's noblest achievements.

Is the man running the most ambitious arts project (including the building of M+ Museum, which will house biggest & most comprehensive collection of Chinese art in the world) Hong Kong has ever seen really less notable than Robert Hammond?

—A L T E R C A R I ✍ 05:26, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

overturn speedy with leave to list at AfD as desired. May meet WP:N, clearly over the A7 bar IMO. Also worried the deleting admin was citing notability requirements in an A7 discussion. Hobit (talk) 12:54, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Send to AfD its a notability concern, so it should be sent to AfD procedurally since there seems to be some argument for WP:N. That's where further discussion belongs, not on DRV or user talk pages. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:13, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it.