Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/China

WP:DSZHWP:DSZH

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to China. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|China|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to China. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Asia.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/China/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also: Wikipedia:China-related topics notice board

China

Suchao

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

Unnecessary. The person who made it showed it like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Suchao&oldid=1308584376 but the second bullet point I removed because it has nothing to do with Suchao. Now it is not needed anymore. Could be speedy deleted under G14. ~Rafael (He, him) • Talk • Guestbook • Projects 13:43, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. ~Rafael (He, him) • Talk • Guestbook • Projects 13:43, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suchao is the pinyin romanization of "苏超" and is used in some websites:

https://www.chinadailyhk.com/hk/article/615505

https://news.tongji.edu.cn/info/1007/91523.htm

https://x.com/xian_shou67114/status/1947927663320117678 Oxygen-dioxide (talk) 14:23, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Oxygen-dioxide it needs to be in English. ~Rafael (He, him) • Talk • Guestbook • Projects 16:22, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is very confidently incorrect. Sometime Chinese languages can be transliterated into English in multiple ways, and there isn't always one correct English version. @Cunard Could you help explain this? Ike Lek (talk) 06:43, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the ping. I've commented below. Cunard (talk) 11:52, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and restore the entry removed in this revision:
Jiangsu Football City League (苏超)
As Oxygen-dioxide noted above, Suchao is the pinyin romanization of "苏超". English-language sources that Oxygen-dioxide provided like this and this refer to Jiangsu Football City League as Suchao (Chinese: 苏超). This entry is valid per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages, which says:
Disambiguation pages (abbreviated often as dab pages or simply DAB or DABs) are designed to help a reader find the right Wikipedia article when different topics could be referred to by the same search term. In other words, disambiguation pages help readers find the specific article they want when there is topic ambiguity.
There is topic ambiguity here regarding whether the word "Suchao" refers to the football player Suchao Nuchnum or the football league Suchao, also known as Jiangsu Football City League. Cunard (talk) 11:52, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Cunard (talk) 11:52, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have restored the Jiangsu Football league link so that the purpose of the redirect page is more clear. I confirmed that Suchao is a nickname for the Jiangsu Football League (but see below), per [1]:
　　同学们，今夏你一定听说过“苏超”联赛。它不仅成为江苏全民关注的焦点，更是在全国范围内掀起热潮。据国家体育总局消息，“苏超”比赛单场上座超6万人，已成功带动江苏全域多场景消费达380亿元。“苏超”即江苏省城市足球联赛，从5月10日开赛至8月17日，已进行8轮48场比赛。在积分榜上，南通队表现出色，暂居首位。这些成绩的背后，是一群来自各行各业的“草根”球员对足球的热爱与执着。 Students, this summer you undoubtedly heard of the "Suzhou Premier League." It's not only captured the attention of Jiangsu residents, but has also sparked a nationwide craze. According to the State General Administration of Sport, single-match attendances for "Suzhou Premier League" have exceeded 60,000, successfully driving 38 billion yuan in multi-sport consumption across Jiangsu. The "Suzhou Premier League," or Jiangsu City Football League, has played 48 matches across eight rounds, from its May 10th launch to August 17th. Nantong's team has performed exceptionally well and currently holds the top spot in the standings. Behind these achievements lies the passion and dedication of a group of grassroots players from all walks of life.
Without any research the term 苏超 struck me as a premier league (英格兰足球超级联赛) reference, which would support the Suzhou Premier League rather than Jiangsu. See [2]. The China Daily article uses Jiangsu Football League", as does the Tongji University article (which is a reprint of China Daily). Oblivy (talk) 13:42, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Han Jin (businessman)

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

This is the only in-depth article about him, but it is written by a "freelance writer". Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 02:21, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, China, Germany, and California. jolielover♥talk 02:46, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. Tseng, Ling-huai 曾令懷 (2022-03-17). "新創團隊轉型就是失敗？從VR攝影機到AI剪輯軟體，LUCID克服難關拿下500萬名使用者" [Is Pivoting a Startup a Sign of Failure? From VR Cameras to AI Editing Software, Lucid Overcomes Challenges and Gains 5 Million Users]. 數位時代 [BusinessNext] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-09-01. Retrieved 2025-09-01.
  The article notes: "金漢雄在加州柏克萊分校攻讀工程學碩士時，就已經被該校的創業氛圍感染了 ... 畢業後，金漢雄先是在記憶卡公司Sandisk擔任了3年的產品經理；由於對攝影的著迷，他開始思考——有沒有可能讓照片也能像人類視覺一樣，呈現出3D影像的效果？於是在2015年成立LUCID了。 ... 2016年以來不斷往返台灣與矽谷的金漢雄，最後決定在2018年時台灣設立辦公室，更在2019年申請了就業金卡定居台灣，這當中的原因，不外乎看上了台灣的軟體人才。"
  From Google Translate: "While pursuing his master's degree in engineering at UC Berkeley, Han Jin was already captivated by the university's entrepreneurial spirit. ... After graduation, he spent three years as a product manager at memory card company Sandisk. Fascinated by photography, he began to wonder: Is it possible to create 3D images in photos, similar to human vision? This led to the founding of LUCID in 2015. ... After commuting between Taiwan and Silicon Valley since 2016, Han Jin finally decided to establish an office in Taiwan in 2018. He then applied for a Gold Employment Card in 2019, primarily due to his interest in Taiwan's software talent."
2. Falstreau, Nathan (2019-07-23). "40 Under 40 Awards: Lucid's Han Jin grows company from an Indiegogo campaign". Silicon Valley Business Journal. Archived from the original on 2024-05-29. Retrieved 2025-09-01.
  The article notes: "Jin originally hails from Hamburg, Germany, and speaks seven languages. His first paying job was as a customer service representative at the age of 23 for baggage claim at Air France: ... He once had dreams of becoming a professional tennis player, but due to an injury, he changed course and moved to the U.S. to obtain a master’s degree in industrial engineering at UC Berkeley, where he was introduced to the startup scene."
3. Bernard, Zoë (2019-09-25). "The Forbes '30 Under 30' Hustle". The Information. Archived from the original on 2025-07-08. Retrieved 2025-09-01.
  The article notes: "Han Jin was in a panic. It was 2017 and the 29-year-old tech entrepreneur was saying goodbye to the final months of his third decade—and with them his dream of ever being selected for the Forbes 30 Under 30 list. In the days before online nominations for the list closed, Jin and the co-founders of his company—a virtual reality camera maker called Lucid—quizzed past honorees for tips on how to make the list. He begged as many as 30 people, including family members, to nominate him. The process was such a singular obsession that Jin made the phrase “Forbes 30 Under 30” the password for various online accounts around the office (he has since changed them). ... His efforts paid off. Jin made the 2018 list, one of 30 people selected by Forbes in consumer technology and a total of 600 figures recognized in sports, healthcare and other categories. ... Fortunately, for people like Jin, who made the Forbes list just before his 30th birthday, there are new opportunities for recognition. In July, Silicon Valley Business Journal named him to its “40 Under 40” list."
4. Pierson, David (2016-05-30). "Someone is going to get rich selling cameras for virtual reality. But who?". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on 2016-05-31. Retrieved 2025-09-01.
  The article notes: "If virtual reality lives up to its hype, someone is destined to get rich from building the medium’s first mass-market camera. Han Jin asks, why not him? The co-founder and chief executive of Lucid VR thinks he’s made a device small and cheap enough to appeal to anyone. His LucidCam fits in your hand like a bar of soap and is available for pre-order at $399. His prototype, cobbled together inside a one-car garage that would hit triple digits during the summer, was novel enough to win Jin $115,000 in crowdfunding last year. Add to that $2.4 million in venture capital funding, and the 28-year-old entrepreneur has reason to feel bullish about the prospects of his Santa Clara company. ... Jin is a fan of GoPro founder Nick Woodman ..."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Han Jin (simplified Chinese: 金汉雄; traditional Chinese: 金漢雄) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 00:22, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Communist Association of Norrköping

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

Small political party based in a city the size of Albany, New York. There is no Swedish article and the Chinese article also has no cites as far as I can tell, so it seems very unlikely to be notable Chidgk1 (talk) 07:40, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Sweden. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:40, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Communist Party in Sweden - E. Ux 09:16, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as above as AtD. Mccapra (talk) 09:38, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:24, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Jumpytoo Talk 00:20, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Communist Party in Sweden, not independently notable.--Staberinde (talk) 16:20, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Qianball

AfDs for this article:

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

See [3]. Fails GNG, and some of the contents might even be a hoax. [4] is the best source I can find, and it fails SIGCOV. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:30, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Tennis, China, and Denmark. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 02:30, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for now, with some reservations about the article itself.
It's not a hoax, unless it's a well executed long con involving a book published in 2016[5] and a website archived back to 2007[6]. The book is barely significant coverage (it's got a paragraph and a picture), and the newspaper article[7] is about a qianball tournament. Is that enough? There are multiple google scholar results about racket sports that include the term as well. This one[8] has a preview that includes the (possibly spurious) Chinese origin but I can't see the contents.
I doubt it's actually something played in China. But as the fortune cookie told me "You will find not everything claimed to originate in China is actually Chinese". Oblivy (talk) 03:15, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
qianball.eu isn't independent, since they're the people who likely created the game. The news report and the book entry (which claims to have got the info from YouTube) fails SIGCOV. I feel most of the Google Scholar results (7) are because of the Wikipedia article. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:31, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't say qianball.eu is an independent source. You claimed it was a hoax, and I was responding to that by showing a long history of the website's existence. You can feel whatever you want, but suggesting academics are just mentioning random sports they found on wikipedia seems unwarranted. Oblivy (talk) 03:37, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, not all journals are created equal. Qianball is obviously not a hoax, but the fact that it originated from China, and is played by a million people there probably is. Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:49, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is likely accurate that game originated in China because the Danmarks Nationalleksikon confirms that is the case. However, it does not make a claim about how many people play it there or how well established it is in China. Only that it came from there.4meter4 (talk) 18:44, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I found an encyclopedia entry in Danmarks Nationalleksikon: https://lex.dk/qianball . If Denmark's national encyclopedia has an entry on this sport we should too.4meter4 (talk) 03:50, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep not a hoax, has recognition in Denmark as seen above. jolielover♥talk 03:59, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per 4meter4. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:28, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zou Qiguo

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

Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:14, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and China. Shellwood (talk) 14:16, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The article links to Chinese Communist Party Committee Secretary, but I think he was a provincial Chinese Communist Party Committee Secretary, not national. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:46, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
State or provincial party leaders are not automatically notable. Bearian (talk) 10:19, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I found limited coverage about the subject in this article and this article. I think there is not enough coverage in reliable sources to establish notability for Zou Qiguo (simplified Chinese: 邹其国; traditional Chinese: 鄒其國) per Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria. I would be willing to reevaluate my position if more sources are found. Cunard (talk) 23:24, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yang Liu (immunologist)

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

Page with a very large number of sources that fail verification, or are irrelevant. Of the five references on his career [1-5] only [2] is valid, the rest not. If I remove all the unverified material not much is left. I also cannot find enough via GS or Google to verify independently as his name is too common. As a failure of WP:V I think it needs a delete. Ldm1954 (talk) 16:47, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Medicine. Ldm1954 (talk) 16:47, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: China and United States of America. jolielover♥talk 17:05, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Connecticut, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Ohio, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:25, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Does this person meet the named chair professorship criteria of NPROF#5? See [9]. There's also a fellowship of AAAS which I understand is highly selective (NPROF#3).
Also can you clarify what you mean by references being "valid"? I checked the first citation which no longer lists the person as they left U of Maryland, but the archive link[10] is clearly this individual. I haven't looked further, but I don't see verifiability concerns.
I will say that the article is written in a highly promotional style but we're not here to discuss cleaning up articles. Oblivy (talk) 22:33, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I do not agree with you
1. I think it is standard that AAAS does not qualify for #3; NAE, NAS do, as do being a selective fellow of a major society such as APS. Note that there is no source for any of his awards.
2. Only distinguished chairs at the highest level qualify for NPROF#5. When someone gives money they typically want their names associated with them. In strong R1 University Depts in the sciences 1/3-2/3 of the full Professors have a named Chair. Of these only a small fraction are at the level for #3.
3. The Scopus link is not encouraging. An h-factor of 48 is borderline for a high citation field. Most troubling it stops in 2015.
The page has too many problems. Ldm1954 (talk) 23:21, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing (aside from the issue of failed links where you are clearly not looking at the archive). I asked for your views. Would be interested to hear from others.
I do think you are misreading NPROF5 - distinguished professorship and named chair (equivalent to...) are in the disjunctive, but I'm not sure if you are saying you considered this chair rather than a statement about "small fraction" at generic universities. Oblivy (talk) 23:28, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please see this archived notability discussion on C5, there are more in the archives at WT:NPROF. Ldm1954 (talk) 02:37, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That discussion (which features your then-1/3 figure, now up-to-2/3) just explains how we ended up with the current language. So we're back to what made you conclude, on the basis of that language, and before bringing this AfD, that this specific/non-generic named professorial chair should be disregarded. You certainly didn't acknowledge it in your nomination rationale. Oblivy (talk) 04:43, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Criteria #5, which says:
Academics meeting any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, are notable.
5. The person has held a distinguished professor appointment at a major institution of higher education and research, a named chair appointment that indicates a comparable level of achievement, or an equivalent position in countries where named chairs are uncommon.
Here is a source I found about the subject:
1. "Awards, Appointments, Announcements". Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 95 (4): 262. 2003-02-19. doi:10.1093/jnci/95.4.262.
  The article notes: "William E. Carson III, M.D., and Yang Liu, Ph.D., have been selected to lead the immunology program at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center–Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute. ... Liu, Ralph W. Kurtz Chair in Pathology and director of the Division of Cancer Immunology in the department of pathology, is looking at why the immune system is not able to control certain cancers."
Since Yang Liu was the Ralph W. Kurtz Chair in Pathology at Ohio State University in 2003, he meets WP:NPROF#5.
Cunard (talk) 09:04, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yubo Ruan

AfDs for this article:

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

I'm reopening this AfD due to the concern of undisclosed paid editing. Most of the previous participants were later found to be part of one sockfarm involved in UPE so this warrant another review. I think the coverage is weak and is based on routine events. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 12:29, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and China. Shellwood (talk) 13:34, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. The sources found by DanikS88 (talk · contribs):
  1. "阮宇博入选"2022福布斯中国Web3.0创新先锋评选"" [Ruan Yubo was selected for the "2022 Forbes China Web3.0 Innovation Pioneer Selection"]. The Outlook Magazine (in Chinese). 2023-03-31. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13 – via Sina Corporation.
    The article is very positive but The Outlook Magazine seems to be a sufficiently reliable source in being a similar source to WP:CHINADAILY and WP:XINHUA. The article notes: "出生于1996年的阮宇博，对于二进制的计算机世界，有着天生的热爱和天才般的动手能力。早在中学期间，他就拿到了13项科技发明大奖和5项专利，包括“微软Imagine Cup一等奖”、“德国纽伦堡发明大赛第一名”、“全国机器人大赛一等奖”等诸多名誉，技术方面的造诣和沉淀，为阮宇博的创业提供了源动力。"
    From Google Translate: "Born in 1996, Ruan Yubo has a natural love for the binary computer world and a genius-like hands-on ability. As early as in middle school, he won 13 science and technology invention awards and 5 patents, including "Microsoft Imagine Cup First Prize", "German Nuremberg Invention Competition First Prize", "National Robot Competition First Prize" and many other honors. His technical attainments and accumulation provided the source of power for Ruan Yubo's entrepreneurship."
    The article notes: "为了继续深造学业和开拓视野，阮宇博先后在波斯顿大学、宾夕法尼亚大学和斯坦福大学就读计算机和金融学等专业。或许天才都有着类似的命运线，阮宇博跟乔布斯和比尔·盖茨的大学经历一样，在读斯坦福期间便选择了肄业，随后进入著名华人科学家张首晟创办的丹华资本，并联合创办了Skylight Investment，从此开启他的金融投资人生。"
    From Google Translate: "In order to continue his studies and broaden his horizons, Ruan Yubo studied computer science and finance at Boston University, University of Pennsylvania and Stanford University. Perhaps geniuses all have similar fates. Ruan Yubo had the same college experience as Steve Jobs and Bill Gates. He chose to drop out while studying at Stanford, and then joined Danhua Capital founded by the famous Chinese scientist Shousheng Zhang, and co-founded Skylight Investment, starting his financial investment life."
  2. Wu, Mengyang 吴梦阳 (2018-10-18). "八维资本阮宇博：熊市洗投机者不意味行业终结" [Eight Dimensions Capital's Ruan Yubo: A Bear Market Clears Out Speculators, but It Doesn't Mean the End of the Industry] (in Chinese). NetEase. Archived from the original on 2025-01-13. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
    This article is very positive but NetEase seems to be a sufficiently reliable source in being a similar source to WP:CHINADAILY and WP:XINHUA. The article notes: "“熊市的正确姿态”第一期，我们专访了八维资本创始人阮宇博，阮宇博生于1996年，年仅22岁。但其创立的八维资本投资了0x、... 在创立八维资本之前，阮宇博已然名声在外。从6岁开始，便钻研IT技术及无线电、单片机方面的应用，随后参加各种科技创新大赛，并取得了不俗的成绩。投资人阮宇博的专业精神，也是在不断进行各种发明研究的同时，逐渐积累而形成的。对于技术出身的阮宇博来说，从技术层面上去筛选区块链投资项目，可以避免很多空气币的项目，正是由于其在技术上精益求精的专业精神，使得八维资本在投资路径上一直保持稳健。阮宇博高中毕业就开始了自己的创业之路，创立了儿童智能硬件公司阿里辛巴，创业之路虽有坎坷，但也为其之后进入投资行业打下了坚实的基础。"
    From Google Translate: "In the first issue of "The Right Attitude in a Bear Market", we interviewed Ruan Yubo, the founder of Eight Dimension Capital. Ruan Yubo was born in 1996 and is only 22 years old. But the Eight Dimension Capital he founded invested in 0x,... Before founding Eight Dimension Capital, Ruan Yubo was already famous. Since the age of 6, he has been studying IT technology and the application of radio and single-chip microcomputers. Later, he participated in various science and technology innovation competitions and achieved remarkable results. The professionalism of investor Ruan Yubo was gradually accumulated while constantly conducting various inventions and research. For Ruan Yubo, who has a technical background, screening blockchain investment projects from a technical level can avoid many air coin projects. It is precisely because of his professionalism in technology that Eight Dimension Capital has remained stable in its investment path. Ruan Yubo started his entrepreneurial journey after graduating from high school and founded Ali Simba, a children's smart hardware company. Although his entrepreneurial journey was bumpy, it also laid a solid foundation for his subsequent entry into the investment industry."
2. Sources from 2014 about Yubo Ruan's invention of a "smart piggy bank":
  1. Zhao, Xuan 赵宣 (2014-12-02). "北京中学生发明智能存钱罐承载留学梦" [Beijing Middle School Student Invents Smart Piggy Bank to Support Study Abroad Dream]. Ta Kung Pao (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2019-10-29. Retrieved 2025-01-13.
    The article notes: "来自北京的18岁中学生发明家阮宇博在近期洛杉矶科技周活动上展出自己发明的智能存钱罐，引起关注。这位第一次来美国的高中生计划明年前往美国留学，并将自己的发明带入美国市场。"
    From Google Translate: "Ruan Yubo, an 18-year-old middle school student inventor from Beijing, exhibited his own smart piggy bank at the recent Los Angeles Science and Technology Week event, which attracted attention. This high school student who came to the United States for the first time plans to study in the United States next year and bring his invention to the American market."
    The article notes: "据介绍，阮宇博从小喜欢科技小发明，希望能解决社会以及人们生活上的一些难题，他从5年级开始参加科技创新大赛，并製作过地铁震动发电装置、助老助残机器人和智能存钱罐。小学六年级，他研发出第一代智能存钱罐，迄今已四度更新。"
    From Google Translate: "According to reports, Ruan Yubo has been fond of small technological inventions since he was a child, hoping to solve some problems in society and people's lives. He has participated in science and technology innovation competitions since the fifth grade, and has made subway vibration power generation devices, robots to help the elderly and the disabled, and smart piggy banks. In the sixth grade of elementary school, he developed the first generation of smart piggy banks, which have been updated four times so far."
  2. Mao, Yu 毛宇 (2015-01-05). Zhao, Zhuqing 赵竹青; Ma, Li 马丽 (eds.). "小钱罐"玩"出大创意带有触屏交互功能类似智能手机" [Small Piggy Bank 'Plays' Big Creativity, Features Touchscreen Interaction Similar to a Smartphone]. Science and Technology Daily (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2015-05-29. Retrieved 2025-01-13 – via People's Daily.
    The article notes: "他叫阮宇博，就读于北京市第八十中学高三年级。他把“龙猫”存钱罐看做自己的创业项目，并投入了7年时间。这7年里，他的另外一些发明还获得了北京市的青少年机器人竞赛一等奖和青少年科技创新大赛二等奖。... 然而坚持带来了转机。阮宇博透露，他所在的八十中鼓励学生科技创新"
    From Google Translate: "His name is Ruan Yubo, and he is a senior student at the 80th Beijing Middle School. He regards the "Totoro" piggy bank as his own entrepreneurial project and has invested 7 years in it. During these 7 years, some of his other inventions have also won the first prize in the Beijing Youth Robot Competition and the second prize in the Youth Science and Technology Innovation Competition. ... However, persistence brought a turning point. Ruan Yubo revealed that his No. 80 Middle School encourages students to innovate in science and technology."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Yubo Ruan (Chinese: 阮宇博) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 08:39, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Smithfield Hog Production Division

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

While Smithfield Foods is undeniably notable but its production unit may not meet the criteria of independent significance and this alone may not establish notability. 🌟 𝒯𝐻𝐸 𝐵𝒪𝒮𝒮! 05:03, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, Companies, Management, Products, China, Germany, United States of America, California, Missouri, North Carolina, and Virginia. 🌟 𝒯𝐻𝐸 𝐵𝒪𝒮𝒮! 05:03, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: While I offer no opinion or comment on the article itself at this time (beyond noting there has been a UPE tag on it since 2021), I did want to note that the nominator is presumably referring to Smithfield Foods (rather than the Smithfield disambiguation page) should anyone propose anything in that direction. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed! Thanks for update.🌟 𝒯𝐻𝐸 𝐵𝒪𝒮𝒮! 23:57, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Animal. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. It is a hog, so to speak. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 20:59, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Hart, John Fraser (2003). The Changing Scale of American Agriculture. Charlottesville, Virginia: University of Virginia Press. pp. 201–209. ISBN 0-8139-2229-1. Retrieved 2025-09-01 – via Google Books.
  The book notes: "In 1989 Dennis Harms and Tad Gordon formed Premium Standard Farms (PSF) and started to develop one of the nation's largest hog farms in Mercer, Putnam, and Sullivan counties in north-central Missouri. They were a good team. Harms had worked in the feed business and knew how to raise hogs on a large scale. Gordon had been a securities trader on Wall Street and knew how to raise money on a large scale. Initially Harms and Gordon had hoped to develop a 1,000-sow farrowing farm west of Ames, Iowa. They planned to contract with local farmers to finish their hogs, but local opposition was so strong that they were not able to obtain the permits they needed, so they dropped the lowa project and moved across the state line into northern Missouri, where they were welcomed. Their northernmost hog farm is so close to Iowa that you can smell it there. ... Missouri had a family farm law prohibiting corporate farms, but the state welcomed PSF by exempting Mercer, Putnam, and Sullivan counties. The company received no other special treatment, no government financing, no subsidies, no waived fees, no streamlined approvals. The only public money it has required was spent on roads during the hectic construction phase in the early 1990s. Harms, Gordon, and other senior executives made their homes in the area, and the company made a special effort to be a good neighbor and a good citizen."
2. Smith, Jonathan Vaughan (November 1999). "Premium Standard Farms and the Transformation of Livestock Geography in Northern Missouri". Southeastern Geographer. Vol. 39, no. 2. University of North Carolina Press. pp. 161–171. doi:10.1353/sgo.1999.0009.
  The article notes: "The purpose of this article is to document how issues of remote corporate ownership, corporate welfarism, obtuseness to small-town and family farm-values, and social and environmental degradation all were handled initially in a creative and geographically perceptive manner by one company, Premium Standard Farms (PSF). The economic, social, and environmental consequences that followed ultimately led to a corporate takeover by Continental Grain and a trend back toward the conventional corporate imagery that PSF had initially eschewed."
3. Joplin, Benjamin A. (1997). "Can Townships Really Smell: Coping with the Malodorous Problems of Hog Farms in Rural Missouri: Premium Standard Farms, Inc. v. Lincoln Township of Putnam County". Missouri Environmental Law & Policy Review. Vol. 5, no. 2. University of Missouri School of Law. Archived from the original on 2024-07-31. Retrieved 2025-09-01.
  The article notes: "In Northwestern Missouri, the town of Princeton embraced the boost Premium Standard Farms (PSF) gave the local economy. Less than 150 miles to the east, the Lincoln Township of Putnam County, Missouri (Lincoln) has put up a fierce battle to PSF' s efforts to remain in the area. Lincoln's battle attracted so much national attention that country singer Willie Nelson brought the annual "Farm Aid" concert to the community in 1995. Since then, PSF has challenged in court the method by which Lincoln sought to restrict PSF' s growth in the township."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Premium Standard Farms to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 09:30, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article previously was at Premium Standard Farms before being moved first to Murphy-Brown of Missouri, LLC and then being moved to the current title Smithfield Hog Production Division. I did a brief search for sources and found the above three sources. There are likely even more sources. There is enough information in these sources to show that the predecessor company Premium Standard Farms is notable. Backed by reliable sources, the Wikipedia article says Premium Standard Farms was the second-largest pork producer and the sixth-largest processor in the United States until Smithfield Foods acquired it in 2007. This strongly establishes the predecessor company's notability. There is enough coverage about the predecessor company's history between its founding in 1988 and the merger in 2013 to support a standalone article and to make it undue weight to merge it into Smithfield Foods. Cunard (talk) 09:30, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bao ying

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

Weak delete or probably merge with karma, see also w:zh:報應, wikt:報應. Also this is more like Wiktionary content, rather than Wikipedia content. ときさきくるみ^{not because they are easy, but because they are hard} 14:07, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Religion, and China. ときさきくるみ^{not because they are easy, but because they are hard} 14:12, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ming yun

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

Delete or probably merge with destiny, see also w:zh:命運, wikt:命運. ときさきくるみ^{not because they are easy, but because they are hard} 13:59, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy, Religion, and China. ときさきくるみ^{not because they are easy, but because they are hard} 13:59, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nahida (Genshin Impact)

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

Fails WP:GNG - while the article is WP:REFBOMBed fairly heavily, there is only trivial coverage and unreliable sources. Multiple editors have noted its failure of GNG, but it was moved into mainspace anyway while disregarding the advice, so I am forced to create an AfD for it to determine the way forward. List of Genshin Impact characters is a potential WP:ATD. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:23, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, and Video games. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 09:23, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: There is this, which appears to be SIGCOV. There is also this. Somebodyidkfkdt (talk) 10:07, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not waste peoples' time throwing out random sources where the name pops up. Explain what exactly about each source demonstrates significant coverage, especially since they are in different languages and not easily understandable. The first source appears to be about "translation techniques" and only uses the character as a random example? ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:58, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree about the first source, it doesn't look very usable. I haven't had the opportunity to look at the second source in detail, but it at least looks promising. Gommeh 📖/🎮 11:01, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just used the ChatGPT to help me read through the second journal. It seems to not have character-design analysis at all for Nahida. Quote ChatGPT: The piece titled “Artificial Intelligence Represented in Genshin Impact, Regulatory Initiatives, and Algorithmic Literacy” uses Genshin Impact’s Sumeru/Akasha arc as a case study to think about real-world AI issues. However, this article uses Nahida’s role as a metaphor for promoting algorithmic literacy and resisting blind dependence on data systems. This feels tricky. If we are to use this source in the article, I can't imagine what the Reception will be like -- though indeed "usable." SuperGrey (talk) 11:59, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ChatGPT conversation. The article is too long to get a word-to-word translation from ChatGPT, so this is as far as I can get. SuperGrey (talk) 12:02, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: While I agree that this page should stay in Draft namespace, GNG talks about its potential, not its current state. We were just talking about the RS problem in the talk page, and I found these two sources: Youxi Tuoluo and Final Weapon. The reliability of both sources is currently being discussed in zhwiki and our source discussion page. Therefore, I suggested that we could wait till clearer source evaluations are established -- but alas, @Zxcvbnm probably did not notice the discussion thread in the talk page. SuperGrey (talk) 10:32, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, unfortunately I did miss that. However, I believe that is fairly moot with regards to this article, as the Final Weapon source is trivial coverage regardless, and is largely about the more overarching plot of the DLC/expansion/patch/etc. than the character of Nahida herself. It seems the other source is essentially the same, with only trivial coverage of the character. Therefore, whether or not it is considered reliable, it shouldn't matter for the purposes of this discussion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:54, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems the other source is essentially the same, with only trivial coverage of the character. -- You need to READ the source, whether through Google Translate or some AI translators. I personally find the Youxi Tuoluo article to be largely focused on Nahida's character design. SuperGrey (talk) 11:02, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I did read it, but it seems like a review of the new story/expansion at large, discussing the character of Nahida in an incidental manner while doing so. I'm not sure it rises to the level of SIGCOV within that summary. Assuming people do believe that it does, it's still just one source out of multiple ones needed. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:49, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I totally agree your point, though SIGCOV looks good enough for Chinese game media like Youxi Tuoluo. They rarely write article dedicated to fictional character only, as they (the good ones) care more about the real-world perspective than English media do.

Here is the third round source search:

Game Daily. A marginally reliable source, so not for GNG, though it might be useful in the article.
Youxi Putao. A generally reliable source, yet the article itself talks about lots of stuff, while Nahida is just a small portion of it. Might be SIGCOV, but that's even more up-to-debate than the Youxi Tuoluo article.

And three more passing mentions that might be useful for the article: Youxi Putao, Youxi Putao, Jinghe.

Heck, why not just write an article about Sumeru instead? My three source hunts have already proven that Sumeru is GNG. We can even think of one possible solution to be redirecting Nahida (Genshin Impact) to a section inside Sumeru (Genshin Impact). SuperGrey (talk) 12:34, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

zh:须弥 (原神) is translation-worthy if anyone decides to write Sumeru (Genshin Impact). SuperGrey (talk) 12:52, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get on it then. As a Genshin fan I think it's about time I write a draft about it. I've gone ahead and done that at Draft:Sumeru (Genshin Impact). Gommeh 📖/🎮 13:42, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the Youxi Tuoluo source is definitely useable, either in an article about Nahida (though maybe not to demonstrate notability) or in one about Sumeru as a whole. I found it quite informative and reliable. Gommeh 📖/🎮 14:37, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: China and Singapore. jolielover♥talk 10:55, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where on-wiki was this discussed beforehand? Wherever it was, I must have missed it. Gommeh 📖/🎮 13:29, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of Genshin Impact characters. I did a LOT of source searching for this character back in 2024 when I made the articles for Furina and Paimon. Unfortunately, there is not enough critical commentary towards Nahida herself to justify an article. It sucks because she IS mentioned in sources a lot (hence the refbombing), but none of it is substantial. The best there is is attribution or discussion of her popularity, but it's not actual reception. None of what is in the article right now, as a matter of fact, is reception. FYI Venti had stronger sourcing out there regarding him than Nahida, and that article was also redirected. There's just not enough here. λ NegativeMP1 20:21, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree. @Gommeh: you can start moving content into List of Genshin Impact characters, in a concise manner. The List itself is very fancruft right now -- you may need to restructure it a bit. SuperGrey (talk) 23:28, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I will later, right now I have a few more important projects related to Genshin that I'm working on at the moment, including the Sumeru draft I mentioned earlier. I'd be more than willing to turn the article into a stub, but IDK if there's enough notability even for that. Would like to hear thoughts on that idea. Gommeh 📖/🎮 00:57, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nom and NegativeMP1. There's really not enough here that isn't just "The character sold well". The controversies section is using almost entirely unreliable sources. I don't really see much significant coverage here to justify a separate article from the list. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 16:40, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Quick ping to User:SuperSkaterDude45, who, IIRC, is familiar with this topic area. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:06, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There is some coverage of her trailer/teaser vides (ex. Siliconera [11], [12], Yahoo News [13], HappyGamer [14]; side note - it's a pretty solid video, I enjoyed it :P). GameRant's article is decent: [15]. Then there is this article in Indonesian journal [16], whose title translates as "Exploring Techniques and Methods for Translating Nahida's Quest Story Dialogue in Genshin Impact". I know, it's hardly premier scholarship, but overall I think she is notable. PS. I wonder if there would be more in Chinese sources? Ping User:Cunard. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:16, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As someone who is normally so selective of notability it is surprising to see you pointing to such highly trivial coverage as evidence of notability. GameRant is also a situational source and cannot be used for that. I disagree, and translating dialog shouldn't make a difference what character it is. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:20, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

007 working hour system

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

Having trouble finding reliable sources that cover this 007 concept in depth. The sources in the article are a Wired article with a passing mention, and a podcast with a passing mention in the podcast summary. Additional googling (to try to figure out what this 007 concept really means, since it's physically impossible for someone to work 24 hours a day 7 days a week) left me confused and without a good understanding of this concept, suggesting this concept isn't really covered by reliable sources in enough detail. Appears to fail the WP:SIGCOV part of WP:GNG. –Novem Linguae (talk) 14:07, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As you have said before on the 007 talk. It likely means the company has a 24/7 work schedule and not the people. It could mean the worker lives next to his computer and takes breaks as needed for sleeping so technically never off the clock. It depends on what their definition of rotational work force means not ours. I believe quoting the sources are sufficient and adding our commentary to explain the insanity/illogic of the concept is not my job to start over thinking it. If you think about it, how many other business paradigms articles covered by WP are essentially smoke and mirrors from businesses covering up something else? The sources are Wired magazine and NPR are not fly by night organizations and they thought it was important to include in their work so it should be be mentioned in WP. Septagram (talk) 16:13, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Rotational work force" is a bit vague. I don't know what that means without further explanation, and the sources I went looking for to explain this didn't really fully explain this. But anyway, that can be discussed on the article talk page if the article is kept. The fundamental problem from a Wikipedia deletion guideline perspective is that this topic probably doesn't pass WP:GNG's "significant coverage" bullet. Significant coverage in my opinion is about 3 meaty paragraphs of detail about the concept, in about 3 reliable sources. Some other editors might have lower standards such as 2 and 2, but no matter what, we need more than just passing mentions of one or two sentences, I think. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:05, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve added lots of references and definitions so you should be happier now. Septagram (talk) 21:41, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:58, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I think there is enough coverage in reliable sources to support mentioning the 007 working hour system on Wikipedia. But there probably is insufficient coverage to support a standalone article as the sources I found largely provide passing mentions of the subject. The 007 working hour system has been called "an exaggeration" (Cheuk 2021 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFCheuk2021 (help)), "a joke" (Dai & Tao 2019 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFDaiTao2019 (help)), and a way for "mocking the system" (Mukherjee 2025 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFMukherjee2025 (help)). The 007 working hour system usually is discussed alongside the 996 working hour system. Possible merge targets are 996 working hour system and Labor relations in China. Here are sources I found about the subject:
1. English-language sources:
  1. Pak, Jennifer (2025-08-14). "Work weeks are getting more intense for AI startups. As the AI arms race heats up, the U.S. and China are leaning into longer work weeks. Marketplace's Jennifer Pak takes us behind the scenes of China's '007' work schedule". Marketplace. Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
    This is a 26-minute video. The article notes: "The new tech trend is the “007” workweek, which does not look like the lifestyle of an international Playboy spy at all. It entails working midnight to midnight, seven days a week — no martinis involved. Marketplace’s China correspondent Jennifer Pak gave us a behind-the-scenes look at the “007” work schedule."
  2. Dai, Sarah; Tao, Li (2019-01-29). "China's work ethic stretches beyond '996' as tech companies feel the impact of slowdown". South China Morning Post. Archived from the original on 2021-05-04. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
    The article notes: "For Ding, the Shenzhen tech worker, it may not be that bad after all. “Though I feel mentally and physically tired all the time, we are paid better than most others in the industry, so we don’t deserve to complain about longer working hours,” he says. He may have spoken too soon. A joke circulating on Chinese social media refers to a new work ethic – “007”, that is “00.00am to 00.00pm”, seven days a week."
  3. Su, Xiaobo (2024). Unhomely Life: Modernity, Mobilities and the Making of Home in China. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley. p. 53. ISBN 978-1-394-17630-4. Retrieved 2025-08-17 – via Google Books.
    The book notes: "The grinding 9-9-6 work culture is widely used in some of China's most prestigious IT corporations. To borrow the words of Jack Ma, the founder of Alibaba (one of China's largest IT corporations), this culture represents a fortune bestowed on those who work hard and earn high salaries. The condition in some corporations is even worse, due to a new work ethic coded as 007, which means working from midnight to midnight, seven days a week, and resting only on rota-tions. Both work cultures overtly defy the Labor Law enacted in 1995."
  4. "China's youth are rebelling against long hours". The Economist. 2024-05-16. Archived from the original on 2024-08-09. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
    The article notes: "Attitudes began to slowly change in 2019 after Jack Ma, a co-founder of Alibaba, celebrated the “blessing” of what he called the “996” work week—working from 9am to 9pm, six days a week. That set off a wave of online griping. Before long workers began to speak of “007” shifts—24 hours a day, seven days a week."
  5. Master, Farah; Yu, Sophie (2025-04-08). "In China, whispers of change as some companies tell staff to work less". Reuters. Archived from the original on 2025-07-24. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
    The article notes: "Recent years have even seen the emergence of a new term "007", referring to being either at work or on call all day every day."
  6. Mukherjee, Vasudha (2025-06-04). "No more 70-hour work weeks? China clamps down on 996 overtime culture". Business Standard. Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
    The article notes: "Workers began mocking the system with phrases like “007”—working all day, every day."
2. Chinese-language sources:
  1. Cheuk, Pak-on 卓柏安 (2021-05-31). "996、886、715、007｜內地瘋傳4組數字　工作制背後加班加到入ICU" [996, 886, 715, 007: Four Viral Work Schedules in Mainland China. Overtime So Extreme It Sends Workers to the ICU]. HK01 (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
    The article notes "至於最後的007實在太過誇張，相信並非真實存生的工時制度，現實上亦都無法實現。007更多是指向一些工作幾乎需要全天候待命，甚至是極度熱愛工作及銷售經紀類工作從業員對自己工作狀態的形容，007亦形容一些十分「困身」、壓力大、需要長時間跟進的工作。"
    From Google Translate: "As for the final 007, it's an exaggeration. It's believed to not be a real-world working schedule and is unrealistic. 007 more often refers to jobs that require near-round-the-clock availability, even for those who are extremely passionate about their work, such as sales agents. 007 also describes jobs that are extremely demanding, stressful, and require long hours of follow-up."
  2. Ke, Jinding 柯金定, ed. (2019-04-16). "007公司是什么梗 007工作制具体规定是什么" [What's the Deal with '007 Companies'? What Are the Specific Rules of the 007 Work System?]. Minnan Net (in Chinese). Fujian Daily. Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
    The article notes: "007公司是什么梗一种比996更狠的弹性工作制。从0点到0点，一周7天不休息。俗称24小时"
    From Google Translate: "What is the 007 company? A more flexible working system than 996. From midnight to midnight, 7 days a week without rest. Commonly known as 24 hours."
  3. Miss Lychee 荔枝小姐 (2021-01-20). Wu, Ling-chen 吳玲臻; Lin, Hsin-ping 林欣蘋 (eds.). "23 歲女孩過勞致死、「007」工時成常態——中國互聯網產業「用命換錢」的血汗紀實" [23-Year-Old Woman Dies from Overwork, 007 Becomes the Norm. How China's Tech Industry Turns Human Lives into Profit]. CommonWealth Magazine (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-07-22. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
    The article notes: "我與還在互聯網打拚的朋友求證，對方表示 007 的狀況確實已經相當普遍，有人平均下班時間是半夜 2-3 點，早上 10 點前要抵達公司，而且週末跟國定假日幾乎都沒得休息。"
    From Google Translate: "I checked with a friend who's still working in the internet industry, and he said the "007" situation is indeed quite common. Some people leave work at an average of 2-3 a.m., arrive at the office by 10 a.m., and barely get any time off on weekends or national holidays."
  4. Liu, Yuanju 刘远举 (2021-09-02). Zhu, Xuesen 朱学森 (ed.). "新京智库："996、007"时代要结束了背后有这些原因" [Beijing News Think Tank: The Era of '996' and '007' Is Coming to an End. Here's Why]. Beijing News (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17 – via Sina Corporation.
    The article notes: "近日，人社部和最高法联合发布超时加班劳动人事争议典型案例，为企业“划红线”，这意味着明确“996”和“007”工作制度是违法的。... 而所谓“007”，则是指从0点到0点，一周7天不休息。"
    From Google Translate: "Recently, the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security and the Supreme People's Court jointly released typical cases of labor and personnel disputes involving excessive overtime work, drawing a red line for companies. This means that the "996" and "007" work systems are illegal. ... The so-called "007" refers to working from midnight to midnight, seven days a week without a break."
  5. "科企行3組數字制「007」最苛刻" [Tech Companies Adopt Three Work Schedules: '007' Is the Harshest]. Oriental Daily (in Chinese). 2024-11-11. Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
    The article notes: "更苛刻數字則有「007」，所指是凌晨零時起上班至翌日零時下班，每周工作7天，即全天候工作，24小時候命，確保員工每天每秒都在工作；這與大家聽慣聽熟的「247」相同。"
    From Google Translate: "Even more demanding is the "007" work schedule, which means starting at midnight and finishing at midnight the following day, seven days a week. This means working around the clock, ensuring employees are working every second of every day. This is similar to the familiar "247" work schedule."
  6. "996和007是违法不是奋斗，过度加班是对员工的盘剥" [996 and 007 Are Illegal, Not Hard Work. Excessive Overtime Is Exploitation of Employees]. Guangming Daily (in Chinese). 2021-03-12. Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17 – via Phoenix Television.
    The editorial notes: "不管是996，还是007，都是违法行为。对违法行为纵情美化，不是糊涂，就是别有用心。"
    From Google Translate: "Whether it's 996 or 007, both are illegal. Unbridled glorification of illegal behavior is either foolish or has ulterior motives."
Cunard (talk) 23:51, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the sources say 007 came about due to Work From Home (WFH) during the Covid pandemic. Others mention people living at the office 24/7. A few do use the term in a humorous way, but mostly it is serious and becoming more common as the work force becomes more competitive. Septagram (talk) 00:36, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I agree there are references to it as a joke, which seems to be the best explanation. It strains credulity to believe a 168 work week is "becoming more common". It's not only illegal but probably physically and mentally impossible to accomplish (consider debates on errors by long-rotation MD residents) on anything but a short-term basis. Stories like Oriental Daily strain the sometimes-narrow credibility ODN has. Based on what @Cunard has found this AfD probably ends with keep, but the article if kept needs to express greater incredulity at any suggestion this is a genuine, common practice. Oblivy (talk) 02:08, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to 996 working hour system. Per WP:PAGEDECIDE if inclusion in a larger article would provide useful additional context then it can be included there rather than in a stub. This would resolve the greater incredulity needed issue and we can revive the article if (somehow) this becomes a thing that is having a real world impact rather than what appears to be absurd hyperbole about employer expectations Oblivy (talk) 02:06, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What about the sources that say 007 came about due to Work from Home (WFH) during the Covid pandemic and people living at the office 24/7? I think people are fixating on mostly the humorous aspects. Labor unions point to types of 007 as a possible loophole for employers to drive an oil tanker through. I think it need an article. Septagram (talk) 03:16, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see a lack of serious inquiry and evidence from press outlets claiming an actual 168 hour work week. Do you believe that people are really at the workplace for 168 hours? The article won't even say for sure. Context is important, and the 996 article will provide it in a way that this article never can. Oblivy (talk) 03:51, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This might be better covered in an article on Labor practices in China. The issue here is the term is a WP:NEOLOGISM. Another possible way to cover this would be in a subsection in an article on the 1995 Labor Law referenced in the sources above. Criticisms of the law, or flouting of the law could be a reasonable part of that article. Best.4meter4 (talk) 14:07, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Svartner (talk) 16:26, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify- upon reviewing a bit of the sources presented here in defense of this articles notability, it is clear for me that this has its distinct definitions enough for me to be distinct from the 996 working hour system , admittedly both articles does indeed have a strong similar theme of labor law "violations", so if this article may need to be improved more in terms of content, then I suggest draftifying it till it has enough substance to be standalone. I am hesitant to have it merged. as per reasons I have already mentioned above. Lorraine Crane (talk) 00:39, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with 996 working hour system. Almost all of the article's citations and articles I found via google search were also about the 996 system. Shocksingularity (talk) 04:05, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:28, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yangwei Linghua

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

This article doesn's have enough significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources which is needed to show notability under WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. 🌟 𝒯𝐻𝐸 𝐵𝒪𝒮𝒮! 21:34, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Bands and musicians, Women, Music, Entertainment, Asia, and China. 🌟 𝒯𝐻𝐸 𝐵𝒪𝒮𝒮! 21:34, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, nearly all coverage of the subject is in Chinese. She's the lead singer for Phoenix Legend, which is a very popular musical duo in China and has been for over twenty years now. You can read an interview here that talks about them and their career, and there's a few articles on Sina that talks about them as well. As for Linghua herself, searching her name in Chinese pulls up hundreds of articles

I will also try to do some work on the article when I get the chance. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 22:58, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding on to this, Linghua was a main competitor on Riding the Wind 2025 [zh] (the sixth season of a popular music competition show on Mango TV) And while not the most reliable source, Baidu Baike has a nice list of every single released by Linghua as a solo artist, which you can find sources for their existance elsewhere. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 03:41, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
Sources
1. The sources found by Microplastic Consumer (talk · contribs). Thank you!
2. Fan, Wenting 范文婷 (2015-11-14). "玲花新歌太洗脑！1岁女儿都会唱了" [Linghua's new song is so catchy! Even her 1-year-old daughter can sing it] (in Chinese). Phoenix Television. Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
  The article notes: "凤凰传奇组合的杨魏玲花和曾毅，两人“分道扬镳”各寻搭档，并同时出了新歌。尤其，玲花的新歌《出去玩》由张惠妹的御用创作人阿怪监制，与歌手曹格、新秀SNH48李艺彤合作，歌曲十分洗脑，玲花称连她一岁四个月的女儿都会唱了！ ... 没了曾毅的伴唱，玲花选择强强联合，与创作型歌手曹格结成新搭档，并与新秀SNH48李艺彤一起。在侗寨采风过程中，收获快乐和笑声，甚至产生再来旅行玩耍的想法，于是创作新歌《出去玩》，该歌旋律明快，歌词简单明了直中人心，"
  From Google Translate: "Phoenix Legend's Yang Wei Linghua and Zeng Yi have parted ways, each pursuing their own partners and releasing new music. Linghua's new song, "Go Out and Play," is especially catchy, produced by A-Mei's regular songwriter, Aguai, and features singer Gary Chaw and rising star Li Yitong from SNH48. Linghua claims even her one-year-four-month-old daughter can sing it! ... Without Zeng Yi's backing vocals, Linghua chose to join forces, forming a new partnership with singer-songwriter Gary Cao and rising star Li Yitong from SNH48. The field trip to the Dong village brought joy and laughter, and even inspired her to travel and play again. This led to the creation of a new song, "Go Out and Play." The song boasts a bright melody and simple, clear lyrics that hit home."
3. Li, Hsin-tung 李鋅銅 (2014-06-25). "力挺陸大媽鳳凰傳奇嗆美媒廣場舞被批喧鬧玲花指惹火大媽後果嚴重" [Standing up for Chinese 'dama': Phoenix Legend fires back at U.S. media. Square dancing criticized as noisy, Linghua warns that angering the 'dama' has serious consequences]. China Times (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
  The article notes: "「鳳凰傳奇」主唱玲花覺得自己是「躺著也中槍」，超級不爽，於是在22日發布的微博中調侃《華爾街日報》，並力挺中國大媽。... 她還追溯八國聯軍的歷史，說美國大兵曾經在中國北京搶東西，到現在東西還沒還呢，這不僅僅是擾民行為， ... 「鳳凰傳奇」是大陸知名的男女二人音樂組合，成員包括女聲主唱楊魏玲花和男聲和聲、說唱曾毅。被認為是2005年後大陸較具影響力的歌手組合之一，出道以來共發行5張原創專輯。"
  From Google Translate: "Phoenix Legend lead singer Ling Hua felt incredibly upset, feeling like she was being "shot in the face even when lying down." She mocked the Wall Street Journal in a Weibo post on the 22nd and offered her support for the Chinese dama. ... She also traced the history of the Eight-Nation Alliance, saying that American soldiers once looted items in Beijing, China, and still haven't returned them. This isn't just a nuisance. ... Phoenix Legend is a well-known mainland Chinese duo, consisting of lead vocalist Yang Wei Linghua and backing vocalist and rapper Zeng Yi. Considered one of the most influential singing groups in mainland China since 2005, they have released five original albums since their debut."
4. Peng, Lizhao 彭立昭 (2012-04-29). "杨魏玲花"凤凰传奇"的爱情传奇" [The Romantic Story of Yangwei Linghua from Phoenix Legend]. People [zh] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-08-17. Retrieved 2025-08-17.
  The article notes: "杨魏玲花是著名歌唱组合“凤凰传奇”的主唱，来自大草原的她声音高亢激昂，穿透力极强，在内地歌坛掀起了一轮又一轮的狂潮。玲花的丈夫徐明朝是音乐主编、著名乐评家和词曲作家，两人从相识的第一天起，就结下了不解之缘，2011年3月，他们携手走入婚姻殿堂。他们的爱情就像玲花在歌里唱的那样：... 就在玲花对进军春晚充满了希望时，一件意想不到的事情发生了：有人爆料《月亮之上》涉嫌抄袭英国歌曲《All Rise》……玲花觉得很委屈，她知道这是一首明明白白的原创歌曲，怎么就成了抄袭作品呢？为了弄清楚事情真相，春晚专家组对《月亮之上》与《AllRise》进行了全方位的鉴定，最终认为并不构成抄袭。"
  From Google Translate: "Yang Wei Linghua is the lead singer of the renowned singing group "Phoenix Legend." Hailing from the prairie, her voice is soaring, passionate, and penetrating, creating waves of sensations on the mainland music scene. Linghua's husband, Xu Mingchao, is a music editor, renowned critic, and songwriter. From the first day they met, they bonded, marrying in March 2011. Their love is just like what Linghua sings about in her song: ... Just when Linghua was full of hope for a spot on the Spring Festival Gala, something unexpected happened: someone reported that "Above the Moon" was suspected of plagiarizing the British song "All Rise." Linghua felt deeply wronged. She knew it was a clearly original song, so how could it be considered a copy? To clarify the matter, the Spring Festival Gala expert panel conducted a comprehensive evaluation of both "Above the Moon" and "All Rise" and ultimately determined that they did not constitute plagiarism."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Yangwei Linghua (simplified Chinese: 杨魏玲花; traditional Chinese: 楊魏玲花; pinyin: Yángwèi Línghuā; Mongolian: Үүлэнхуар Üülenkhuar) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 11:25, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Phoenix Legend. The voters above have uncovered sources that are reliable but most are actually about Phoenix Legend, indicating that Yangwei Linghua has achieved little independently outside the group, with the exeption of one solo song after they split in 2017. I can find nothing about any further solo activities, but I am probably restrained by language issues so that's why I recommend redirecting as an alternative to deletion. Anything known about her biography, including her solo work, can be added to the group's article, which by the way is badly out-of-date. This same argument could possibly apply to her groupmate Zeng Yi (singer) if anyone wants to inspect his article for notability. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 18:18, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
After looking through some sources, Zheng Yi had some business ventures in China and has been attracting controversy lately (alongside a larger solo career), if anything, I would say he is likely the more notable of the two. Microplastic Consumer (talk) 03:15, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Phoenix Legend per WP:ATD. Not independently notable from the band. The sources are not about her predominantly but about that group.4meter4 (talk) 14:26, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as opinion is divided here between editors advocating Keeping it and those arguing for Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:00, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep the subject is adequately covered in secondary sources as shown by @Cunard particularly the Phoenix and People sources. It's a close call but I think she squeaks by on NMUSICIAN by having separate coverage (i.e. by independently establishing notability via NBASIC) and I suppose for her role in composing 月亮之上.

One further thought. While not an "official" argument for keep here at AfD, it does seem a bit unseemly for the male member of a duo having a page and the female one not. I think she passes GNG so this isn't the basis of my vote but it is on my mind. Oblivy (talk) 13:18, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Still not seeing consensus here.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:03, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong related deletions

Georgina Bruni

AfDs for this article:

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

This ~~BLP~~biography on a UFO enthusiast has had unresolved notability tags for the last nine years. It is sourced to non-RS such as the subject's own email newsletter "Hot Gossip", UFO fanzines, Ancient Aliens host Nick Pope's website, etc.. It also has a WP:PRIMARY and a single reference in The Independent.

Fails GNG: A WP:BEFORE on JSTOR returns nothing. A BEFORE on Google Books finds numerous instances of her being quoted and profiled in non-RS UFO cruft. A BEFORE on Google News finds copious instances of her being quoted or mentioned in "weird news" features on flying saucers in RS [17] but nothing which contains enough biographical information to crest WP:SIGCOV.
Fails NAUTHOR: She does not meet the standards of WP:NAUTHOR on the basis of review of her book. WP:NAUTHOR unambiguously affirms the multiple review test is the second of a two-part requirement: "created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work" and "In addition", such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" We do not have an RS that establishes she has created a "well-known work", ergo, it doesn't pass the first part of the two-part NAUTHOR test, and no quantity of book reviews will remedy that.

Chetsford (talk) 20:18, 30 August 2025 (UTC); 01:20, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:00, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:00, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:00, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:00, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:00, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Jersey-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:01, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:01, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:01, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:01, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:02, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I did an extremely basic WP:BEFORE search and was able to find easily a peer reviewed journal article (Grove, A Look Back at Georgina Bruni's Book: You Can't Tell the People: The Definitive Account of the Rendlesham Forest UFO Mystery) and a book (Pope, Encounter in Rendlesham Forest : the inside story of the world's best-documented UFO incident) that discuss her at length. She easily meets NAUTHOR.
I have added the two citations to the article. Considering that the existence of sources is sufficient (per WP:NEXISTS) and that the nomination does not show a proper BEFORE search done, this AfD should be withdrawn. I invite @Chetsford to consider doing so. Oblivy (talk) 23:01, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I decline. Both sources you added are unambiguously non-RS / independent.

You Can't Tell the People: The Definitive Account of the Rendlesham Forest UFO Mystery is written by Bruni herself and is therefore not WP:INDEPENDENT. The foreword is written by Nick Pope, the emcee of "Ancient Aliens: Live On Tour!" [18] — a traveling UFO carnival associated with the History Channel which posits giant Martians built the pyramids with magic gravity beams.
Journal of Scientific Exploration, the source for the Grove article, is associated with the Society for Scientific Exploration a crank, pseudoscience group.

Chetsford (talk) 01:14, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The book that was added was not Bruni's book, and it discusses her activities at some length. Your comment strikes me as very WP:IDONTLIKE but I understand you don't want to withdraw the AfD so it will run its course, Oblivy (talk) 01:48, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, you're right, you added Encounter in Rendlesham Forest : the inside story of the world's best-documented UFO incident [19] , written by Nick Pope, emcee of "Ancient Aliens: Live On Tour!" [20] — a traveling UFO carnival associated with the History Channel which posits giant Martians built the pyramids with magic gravity beams. Still not RS. Chetsford (talk) 02:16, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

An author is presumed notable if:

1 The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors...or
3 The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work

There is ample evidence her work is regarded as important among her peers, i.e., the paranormal community. Her book is clearly regarded as significant within the field. It is not relevant if we think she and their peers lack credibility, as long as we stay within WP:FRINGE. This article is not promoting her ideas as truthful (or really promoting them at all), so that's not an issue and even if it was it could be cleaned up.

With respect to the Journal of Scientific Exploration there has been some discussion at WP:RSN about it but there has never been a community consensus that it is not RS. Oblivy (talk) 10:51, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MultiBank

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

Doesn't seem to pass WP:ORG notability guidelines. All three cited sources seem to be WP:CORPTRIV. Searching online, I failed to find any WP:CORPDEPTH coverage. It appears to be yet another Forex broker. A dedicated article seems to be premature at this moment. Vgbyp (talk) 17:24, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance, Companies, Internet, Hong Kong, United Arab Emirates, and California. jolielover♥talk 17:50, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cryptocurrency-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 07:32, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. In my searches for sources, I found largely press releases. The company does not pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria. Cunard (talk) 23:01, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tang Kam Man

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

Declined prod. Fails WP:SPORTSCRIT and WP:NOLY. LibStar (talk) 23:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cycling, Olympics, and Hong Kong. LibStar (talk) 23:12, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hong Kong at the 1976 Summer Olympics#Cycling – As WP:ATD. Svartner (talk) 01:53, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – WP:HEYed. Svartner (talk) 00:46, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Hong Kong at the 1976 Summer Olympics#Cycling, where the person's name is listed. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:52, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:
People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.
- If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
I expanded and sourced the article using articles from the South China Morning Post, Wah Kiu Yat Po, and Ta Kung Pao. There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Tang Kam Man (traditional Chinese: 鄧錦文; simplified Chinese: 邓锦文) to pass Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria.
Cunard (talk) 09:03, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Pinging BeanieFan11 (talk · contribs), who removed the proposed deletion. Cunard (talk) 09:03, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, I had a feeling you'd be able to save this, Cunard :) BeanieFan11 (talk) 14:34, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Clearly notable upon expansion. Seacactus 13 (talk) 00:42, 26 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY. Passes WP:SPORTSBASIC.4meter4 (talk) 02:45, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Do changes to the article change anyone's opinion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:08, 28 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep- given these additional expansions that has improved greatly the subjects notability.Lorraine Crane (talk) 20:13, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Subject clearly never should have been nominated. Passes WP:SPORTSCRIT. – Ike Lek (talk) 20:24, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I spent a few hours looking at this. Based on my assessment, I find that the article passes WP:GNG, WP:HEY and WP:SPORTSBASIC. There were perhaps some minor concerns regarding WP:SIGCOV, but I find that on expansion these are obviated. WP:SPORTSCRIT is satisfied as well. In total, the degree of SIGCOV by RSS is sufficient to establish subject notability. Zach^H007 17:47, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of Hong Kong post offices

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

WP:NOTPRICE explicitly says that lists of offices or locations are not permitted on Wikipedia. PROD was removed because of a secondary source discussing the grouping being added to the article, but it doesn't alleviate NOTPRICE. Let'srun (talk) 18:10, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Hong Kong. Let'srun (talk) 18:10, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - My only concern is that this is only the tip of the listings of such buildings. Please see Category:Government buildings by country, as well as Category:Postal systems by country. Wikipedia is full of such categories. Either delete all of such listings on Wikipedia, or leave them all as is. — Maile (talk) 19:09, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OSE. Let'srun (talk) 20:02, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I randomly looked through around 1/3 of the countries under Category:Post office buildings by country. The articles using this category are about individual post office locations. There three of these articles for Hong Kong. I could not find other list articles for other countries. However, there are list articles for the USPS by state. @Let'srun, I understand your point regarding WP:OSE but there is relevance when considering if a nonprofit governmental agency and with a building that is frequently a community landmark falls under WP:NOTPRICE. A key may be that WP: NOTPRICE says "Listings to be avoided include...". It does not say these are forbidden. That is because sometimes this content is informational and encyclopedic, rather than promotional. For example, articles regularly include a list of all locations of a multi-campus university and schools and churches are sometimes listed in articles about cities or counties. Rublamb (talk) 21:10, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Post offices are generally a place where business is conducted, and while I get what you are saying I don't think the government association matters. As it stands, this list is only in service of "conducting the business of the topic of the article", and is promotional in nature. If this list is deleted, I would likely nominate those USPS articles next, but don't wish to overwhelm AfD and want to see what kind of consensus is found here first. I also don't those examples you listed as being relevant here. Let'srun (talk) 21:33, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.

The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists, which says, "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines; notable list topics are appropriate for a stand-alone list." I will show below that "Hong Kong post offices" has been treated as "a group or set by independent reliable sources".

Sources

Ji, Ping; Chen, Kejia (2007). "The Vehicle Routing Problem: The Case of the Hong Kong Postal Service". Transportation Planning and Technology. Vol. 30, no. 2–3. Taylor & Francis. pp. 167–182. doi:10.1080/03081060701390841.

The article notes: "There are 35 post offices located in different districts in the Hong Kong Island including the GPO, as shown in Figure 1. Their names are listed in Table 1."

The article notes: "In the last decade alone, the number of post offices has increased from 107 in 1989 to 129 by August 1999. Of them, 35 are located on Hong Kong Island, 41 in Kowloon, and 53 in the New Territories and the outlying islands."

Table 1. Post offices in Hong Kong Island
Aberdeen (ABD)
Hing Fat Street (HFS)
Sai Ying Pun (SYP)
Ap Lei Chau (ALC)
Hing Man Street (HMS)
Shau Kei Wan (SWN)
Causeway Bay (CWB)
Kennedy Town (KTN)
Sheung Wan (SHW)
Chai Wan (CHW)
King's Road (KNG)
Siu Sai Wan (SSW)
Cloud View Road (CLV)
Lei Tung (LTG)
Stanley (STY)
General Post Office (GPO)
Morrison Hill (MHL)
Tai Koo Shing (TKS)
Gloucester Road (GLR)
North Point (NPT)
Tsat Tsz Mui (TTM)
Happy Valley (HAV)
Peak (PEK)
Wah Fu (WFU)
Harbour Building (HAR)
Perkins Road (PKR)
Wan Chai (WCH)
Harcourt Road (HCR)
Pok Fu Lam (PFL)
Wong Chuk Hang (WKH)
Heng Fa Chueng (HFC)
Queen's Road (QRD)
Wyndham Street (WYN)
Hennessy Road (HEN)
Repulse Bay (RPB)

Chow, Ka-kin 周家建; Cheung, Shun-kwong 張順光 (2015). 坐困愁城：日佔香港的大眾生活 [Trapped in a City of Sorrow: Everyday Life in Japanese-Occupied Hong Kong] (in Chinese). Hong Kong: Joint Publishing. p. 110. ISBN 978-962-04-3775-5. Retrieved 2025-08-17 – via Google Books.

The book notes:

隨著郵政服務恢復運作，個別郵政局陸續重開，繼續為市民提供服務。最早恢復服務的是香港中央郵政局和九龍中央郵政局，其他郵政局亦陸續投入服務。各區郵政局重開日期，詳見下表。

郵政局名稱重開日期

香港中央郵局 1942年1月22日

九龍中央郵局 1942年1月22日

灣仔郵政局 1942年2月14日

上環郵政局 1942年2月14日

油蔴地郵政局 1942年2月14日

深水埗郵政局 1942年2月14日

九龍城郵政局 1942年2月14日

西營盤郵政局 1942年3月26日

元朗郵政局 1942年3月26日

大埔郵政局 1942年3月26日

赤柱郵政局 1942年5月1日

九龍塘郵政局 1942年11月15日
上述多間郵政局，以九龍城郵政局的服務時間最短，主要是受啟德機場擴建工程影響，由於該郵政局位於擴建地段，因此在1942年11月14日關閉，取而代之的是新設立的九龍塘郵政局

From Google Translate:

As postal services resumed, individual post offices gradually reopened and continued to provide services to the public. The Hong Kong Central Post Office and Kowloon Central Post Office were the first to resume services, with other post offices gradually returning to service. The reopening dates of post offices in various districts are detailed in the table below.

Post Office Reopening Date

Hong Kong Central Post Office 22 January 1942

Kowloon Central Post Office 22 January 1942

Wan Chai Post Office 14 February 1942

Sheung Wan Post Office 14 February 1942

Yau Ma Tei Post Office 14 February 1942

Sham Shui Po Post Office 14 February 1942

Kowloon City Post Office 14 February 1942

Sai Ying Pun Post Office 26 March 1942

Yuan Long Post Office 26 March 1942

Tai Po Post Office 26 March 1942

Stanley Post Office 1 May 1942

Kowloon Tong Post Office 15 November 1942
Of the post offices listed above, Kowloon City Post Office had the shortest service hours, primarily due to the Kai Tak Airport expansion project. As it was located on the expansion site, it closed on 14 November 1942, and was replaced by the newly established Kowloon Tong Post Office.

There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow the subject to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

Cunard (talk) 22:03, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: WP:NOTPRICE says:
A resource for conducting business. Neither articles nor their associated talk pages are for conducting the business of the topic of the article. Listings to be avoided include, but are not limited to: business alliances, clients, competitors, employees (except CEOs, supervisory directors and similar top functionaries), equipment, estates, offices, store locations, contact information, patent filings, products and services, sponsors, subdivisions and tourist attractions. An article should not include product pricing or availability information (which can vary widely with time and ___location) unless there is an independent source and encyclopedic significance for the mention, which may be indicated by mainstream media sources or books (not just product reviews) providing commentary on these details instead of just passing mention. Wikipedia is not a price comparison service to compare prices and availability of competing products or a single product from different vendors. Lists of creative works are permitted. Thus, for example, Wikipedia should not include a list of all books published by HarperCollins, but may include a bibliography of books written by HarperCollins author Veronica Roth.
This list is not being used as "a resource for conducting business". It is being used to document Hong Kong's post offices which have been discussed as a group by academic sources (Wikipedia:Notability#Stand-alone lists). The list does not include "product pricing or availability information". The list includes encyclopedic information about each post office such as its English and Chinese name, its ___location, its year of establishment, its year of closing, and a photo. The list is not being used as "a price comparison service to compare prices and availability of competing products". Cunard (talk) 22:03, 17 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Hongkong Post. Majority of these list entries are merely sourced from Hongkong post to prove they exist, which itself violates WP:NOTDIR. There are a few references that would be ideal on the parent article, to use for the small number of list entries that are indeed notable. Ajf773 (talk) 08:49, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No opposition to a redirect as suggested. Let'srun (talk) 12:20, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just added Hongkong Post as a source because I believe that is better than having no sources. As there are already enough secondary sources to prove notability for a stand-alone list article, it is not really a factor and can be improved later by someone who reads Chinese. However, I would maintain that WP:NOTDIR does not apply because this list goes beyond being a directory, because it includes dates, photographs, and historical details. Rublamb (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I had to really think about this one as it crosses over numerous policies and guidelines. I could say keep under WP:HEY but think more information is required.

WP:SAL: I reviewed the sources that would translate to English and also added other sources, including one of the secondary sources suggested above. (see WP:HEY) @Cunard is correct. There are reliable secondary sources that discuss the post offices of Hong Kong as a group. That is what is needed for a stand-alone list article to meet notability. Also, I am confident that other sources exist to improve this article, but I was not able to fully access them because the source were in Chinese.
WP:NOTDIRECTORY specifically applies to simple lists, such as a list of phone numbers, that do not include contextual information showing encyclopedic merit. Although this article includes addresses, it also includes contextual information that is not directory in nature, such as date of establishment and closure, photographs of the buildings, and historical details about the post offices. Although it would benefit from more information and sources, this is an encyclopedic list rather than a directory entry.
WP:NOTPRICE: This is the issue that gave me the most pause, and I totally see why @Let'srun called for this AfD. The indent of this policy is to prohibit business self-promotion via Wikipedia, specifically stating, "Neither articles nor their associated talk pages are for conducting the business of the topic of the article " WP:NOTPRICE suggests this can be achieved by avoiding the inclusion "business alliances, clients, competitors, employees (except CEOs, supervisory directors and similar top functionaries), equipment, estates, offices, store locations, contact information, patent filings, products and services, sponsors, subdivisions and tourist attractions". Note that this list is items to be "avoided", not items that can never be included. That is because context matters. This article is not promotional in a way that matches the intent of WP:NOTPRICE; there is no discussion of services or products. The only issue could be "store locations". But given that this article includes defunct locations, it is difficult say its intent is to conduct business. As discussed above, a list of businesses is allowed in Wikipedia, provided the intent and content is encyclopedic. If this article was a simple list that just included ___location name, address, hours of operation, and phone number, it would violate WP:NOTPRICE. But since it lacks the "conducting business" content and also includes historic details that are encyclopedic and non-promotional, it does not fail based on WP:NOTPRICE. Rublamb (talk) 17:15, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Pretty blatant violation of WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Cunard's typical disruptive wall-of-text is completely insufficient to demonstrate notability. While the general topic of the postal system in Hong Kong might very well be notable, a directory-like listing of the ___location of each one most certainly is not, and its existence flies in the face of WP:NOT. Most of the entries here are unsourced, further violating WP:NOR. One of the few exceptions, picked at random, that is sourced contains the oh-so-encyclopedic content of " This post office closed during World War II, reopening on 14 February 1942. It moved to a new building in 1986. ". Wow. Let me say that again. WOW. It closed briefly during WWII, and it later moved locations in the '80s. The few other entries with commentary are pretty much the same level. This is bottom-of-the-barrel stuff, even by Wikipedia's standards. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:02, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: As part of my review of this AfD, I went through and found sources for each entry, unless noted as citation needed. As per MOS for lists, the citation is included in the text above the table, rather than being repeated over and over again. Regardless of whether or not you find the added info useful, dates of operation and the notes column are not directory information and show a direction of expansion for this article. Rublamb (talk) 19:22, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
These are primary, but it's not even all that relevant. The problem is that this is a directory of post office locations and essentially nothing more. But Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. The minuscule amount of encyclopedic information that might actually be here (like singling out the oldest post office) can go in a history section of the main article about the HK postal system. The notability of the system itself, along with its history, does not justify a list like this. And there are no sources that justify the existence of this list. This is WP:COMMONSENSE territory. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 20:46, 19 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, there are two scholarly articles that discuss post offices in Hong Kong as a group. That is what is so crazy about this one, it meets notability for a stand-alone list. Rublamb (talk) 00:06, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Most of these are not notable. Lorstaking (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:NLIST says "The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been. Because the group or set is notable, the individual entries in the list do not need to be independently notable". Since the grouping has, as noted above by @Cunard and reiterated by @Rublamb, been the subject of multiple independent scholarly discussions, it meets this requirement. No individual notability needs to be shown for each post office unless it has a standalone article. Oblivy (talk) 01:55, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This list is much more than a simple directory. It contains referenced historical information about many of the post offices in Hong Kong, thus contributing value to the history of postal services in Hong Kong. Individual post offices have historically played an important role in the local society. Most of them do not individually deserve an article, but this collective article is a very good way to collect such information in one place. Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 09:52, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The arguments to keep have no basis in policy. The postal system in Hong Kong is notable, obviously. And an article about its history, including the role of specific post offices, is likely viable. But none of the provided sources suggest that the grouping of all post offices is notable over and above the postal service itself. The sources are about the system, not the list: NLIST is not met. The similarity to other categories isn't a reason to keep: quite apart from that being an argument to avoid, we specifically use categories to group notable topics for which lists are not viable. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:34, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Views seem evenly split, albeit not all carrying the same P&G weight. Please focus your arguments on whether the list meets WP:STANDALONE, which has clearer criteria than the sweeping WP:NOTDIRECTORY.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 20:45, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The sources identified by Cunard do indeed demonstrate that the post offices of Hong Kong have been discussed in WP:SIGCOV in way that is not trivial or reflective of a directory. As such it meets the criteria at WP:NLIST. Note that this would not be true of post offices in every city, and this list isn't a precedent for similar lists in other locales. The sourcing would need to be there to justify other lists of this type.4meter4 (talk) 22:05, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:DIRECTORY and WP:NOPAGE I am usually err on the side of including things, but the interpretations of WP:NLIST offered above are simply not logically tenable. Two independent, reliable sources could list the phone numbers of every pharmacy in New York City. Does that mean we then need to create a wikipedia page called List of pharmacy phone numbers in New York City? No, because there is no encyclopedic value in that beyond turning Wikipedia into a directory. The same answer applies with regards to post offices. WP:NOPAGE is also instructive in this regard - when a subject passed WP:SIGCOV, that means it clears the minimum bar of notability to be covered on the Wikipedia. How exactly that coverage occurs - whether by way of its own article, of a fully included list, or as a summarized mention within another article - remains up to the community to decide. Flip^and Flopped ㋡ 22:21, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment None of the delete votes seriously engage with the wording of WP:NOTDIRECTORY It has six categories - 1 simple lists without contextual information, 2 loosely associated topics, 3 non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations, 4 genealogies, 5 program guides and 6 business directories. This article is clearly not 2, 3, 4, or 5. It has information on specific locations, like historical moves, beyond a simple list. It's not 6 as its function is not to help people find post offices, and it includes branches which were closed.
I have addressed in my vote above why this satisfies WP:NLIST.
The WP:LISTORG requirement within WP:STANDALONE for organizations is similar to NLIST, which is that individual notability does not need to be shown for each component of the list. Oblivy (talk) 01:05, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am only responding to this comment because of your supposition that I have "not seriously engaged" on account of failing to reference the six NOTDIRECTORY categories. With respect, you need to scroll further up the WP:NOT page where it clearly states that the examples under each section are not exhaustive.

In no way shape or form has an editor "failed to seriously engage" with WP:NOTDIRECTORY if they don't make explicit reference to one of the six example categories, because per WP:NOT, they are very explicitly just that: non-exhaustive examples. A !delete vote which more broadly states that the article is not in keeping with the spirit of WP:NOTDIRECTORY is a perfectly valid !vote.
And in case I wasn't clear, I completely disagree with your propositions about categories #1 and #6:
- At best, a slim minority of the articles have substantive "notes" listed about when the post office was founded. The vast majority are a simple listing of their ___location and founding date, with a brief note.
- The inclusion of a handful of closed offices does not transform what is otherwise a business directory into something else, in the same way that the Yellow Pages doesn't become a history textbook as soon as one or two of the phone numbers become outdated. "Its function is not to help people find post offices" is also completely subjective statement of opinion - maybe I say that is what the article's function is. That type of statement without elaboration does not critically engage with the policy.
There are reasonable, arguable positions to keep or delete - far from "unserious engagement". All of the !votes have seriously engaged. Flip^and Flopped ㋡ 02:03, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was careful to say nobody had engaged with the wording of NOTDIRECTORY, which in the case of an organization includes the six categories. Sorry if you feel I'm mischaracterizing your argument, but IMHO "Per [[WP:NOTDIRECTORY]]" is just namechecking the policy without applying it. If you disagree I'm OK with that but I stand by my comment. Oblivy (talk) 02:13, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per all above. ClubTitibooFn (talk) 01:17, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 06:30, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Cunard, passes NLIST. PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:35, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - meets the criteria of WP:STANDALONE, i.e., the list topic ... has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources. In addition, Hongkong Post has a link to the article. On average, 182 people view this list every month, so it seems to be of value to quite a few readers.--DesiMoore (talk) 16:02, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/China

Contents

China

Suchao

Han Jin (businessman)

Communist Association of Norrköping

Qianball

Zou Qiguo

Yang Liu (immunologist)

Yubo Ruan

Smithfield Hog Production Division

Bao ying

Ming yun

Nahida (Genshin Impact)

007 working hour system

Yangwei Linghua

Hong Kong related deletions

Georgina Bruni

MultiBank

Tang Kam Man

List of Hong Kong post offices

Taiwan related deletions

郵政局名稱	重開日期
香港中央郵局	1942年1月22日
九龍中央郵局	1942年1月22日
灣仔郵政局	1942年2月14日
上環郵政局	1942年2月14日
油蔴地郵政局	1942年2月14日
深水埗郵政局	1942年2月14日
九龍城郵政局	1942年2月14日
西營盤郵政局	1942年3月26日
元朗郵政局	1942年3月26日
大埔郵政局	1942年3月26日
赤柱郵政局	1942年5月1日
九龍塘郵政局	1942年11月15日

Post Office	Reopening Date
Hong Kong Central Post Office	22 January 1942
Kowloon Central Post Office	22 January 1942
Wan Chai Post Office	14 February 1942
Sheung Wan Post Office	14 February 1942
Yau Ma Tei Post Office	14 February 1942
Sham Shui Po Post Office	14 February 1942
Kowloon City Post Office	14 February 1942
Sai Ying Pun Post Office	26 March 1942
Yuan Long Post Office	26 March 1942
Tai Po Post Office	26 March 1942
Stanley Post Office	1 May 1942
Kowloon Tong Post Office	15 November 1942