Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Lulu Wang: Difference between revisions

< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 20:53, 31 January 2015 editVictuallers (talk \| contribs)Administrators166,508 edits Absurd nomination, clearly notable← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 07:23, 13 February 2022 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk \| contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
			:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
			<!--Template:Afd top

			Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

			The result was '''speedy keep'''. Pretty clear consensus that this is a notable person ] (]) 21:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
	===]===		===]===
	{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD\|B}}

	:{{la\|Lulu Wang}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks"></span>)		:{{la\|Lulu Wang}} – (<includeonly>]</includeonly><noinclude>]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks"></span>)
Line 15:		Line 21:
	:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. ] (]) 14:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)</small>		:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the ]. ] (]) 14:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)</small>
	*'''Speedy keep''' Absurd nomination, clearly notable, and ''thankyou'' {{u\|Drmies}} for the initial legwork. (thx for phrasing this Dr. B ] (]) 20:53, 31 January 2015 (UTC)		*'''Speedy keep''' Absurd nomination, clearly notable, and ''thankyou'' {{u\|Drmies}} for the initial legwork. (thx for phrasing this Dr. B ] (]) 20:53, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
			:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 07:23, 13 February 2022

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was speedy keep. Pretty clear consensus that this is a notable person only (talk) 21:45, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Lulu Wang

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

This article does not meet WP:ARTIST or WP:GNG. Contains a lot of factual errors, no major coverage in reliable sources. MaRAno 10:04, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Comment: The creator of this article, Drmies, delisted Lips Are Movin – an article the nominator has worked on extensively – as a good article a few hours before this nomination was made. Seems like a classic case of WP:REVENGE. I'm remaining neutral for now, though a quick Google search showed at least some coverage: –Chase (talk / contribs) 21:40, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

After seeing more sources that have been added, it's an obvious keep from me. Closer should consider a speedy keep – WP:SK#2 may be applicable as this nomination is disruptive, vexatious, and has extremely questionable motives. –Chase (talk / contribs) 17:23, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you Chase: yeah, that's kind of silly. It's ironic: this article was created after a prompt on Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Women writers/Missing articles; I suspect either Rosiestep or Ipigott added it. Rosiestep, like you I'm always looking for the DYK and perhaps you can find a thing or two. Coverage is not so easy for a non-English writer, but we'll find it through the DBNL, for instance. With that many books in such a small country, she's bound to be notable, and I have no doubt that MaranoFan will do the decent thing and withdraw the nomination. I'll beef up the article, of course. Drmies (talk) 22:33, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Keep Can't see any valid reason to delete. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 22:55, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
Snow keep. If the nominator had done a bit of googling, they would have learned that Lulu Wang was the "best-selling Dutch author of 1997". In addition to adding this gem, I've expanded the article with other content to include inline citations. Check out her Authority Control -- quite awesome, indeed. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:40, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Speedy keep Absurd nomination, clearly notable, and thankyou Drmies for the initial legwork..♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:51, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:35, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy keep Absurd nomination, clearly notable, and thankyou Drmies for the initial legwork. (thx for phrasing this Dr. B Victuallers (talk) 20:53, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.