Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hong Kong Secondary Students Union

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 of the debate was keep (no consensus). Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hong Kong Secondary Students Union

Asserts notability and might be notable, but self-promotional language makes me doubt notability. Spammy personal pages have all been speedied (by myself). Immature actions by members during the AfD process of the individual pages also makes me doubt notability of this organization. Very, very weak keep. --Nlu 23:05, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

• So let me get this straight... you nominated this for AFD but voted to keep it? Am I missing something here? Oh and by the way, Delete as non-notable cruft unless someone can find some verifiable sources beyond a chinese website for this group.Gateman1997 23:43, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete organization of 150 teenagers is not notable.--Jiang 00:14, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete or cut down to size. The article spends vastly more time talking about the group itself than it does about what notable things the group has done or participated in, making me doubt there is much to be said. The series of resume-spam articles that this article spawned also make me suspect this article was created more for self-promotion than to assert notability. —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-12-07 02:02:39Z
• After a parade of now-deleted articles of Hong Kong high school students, we're now considering their club. Based on the article, it's just as (non)notable as their members for en.wikipedia.org. Delete B.Wind 06:58, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
• Comment I've left a comment with one wikipedian who seems to be heavily involved with the club. They claim to be active in Hong Kong politics and I've asked that they provide proof of this in the article (imo staging a few protests is not enough to be "active", protesting is the point of unions). Unless they can provide proof of how they have affected/changed policy or such, then I will vote to delete as well. dr.alf 07:44, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: I did receive a message from dr.alf, and I'm not sure if she/he was referring to me for saying "who seems to be heavily involved". I myself has never been involved in the union, and know none of its members. What I know about them was from the media. — Instantnood 16:03, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. There's no clue those immature comments were from members of this organisation. The organisation is notable in the way that it was the first in Hong Kong that were created by secondary students, and was able to organise a relative large number of students to take part in the protests. They were covered by the media for their action. It's uncommon here for secondary students to turn out and speak up. — Instantnood 16:03, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
• weak but Keep if it passes verifiability. SchmuckyTheCat 17:37, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep The only thing you Wikipedians have to do is to cut down the size. I don't agree with Jiang who said the union have 150 members only, how about the organization-member (student conuncils)?

User:TonySapphire 23:38, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

• Keep No matter how Wikipedia discriminate students this article is not about a student or a baker!!!! HKSSU 09:37, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Account appears to have been created solely for editing AfDs (this one and the now-deleted Kitty Ng). --Nlu (talk) 10:55, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
    • I take that comment back. The account also was created for vandalism, as it engaged in a number of content and move vandalisms today. --Nlu (talk) 06:53, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
• Weak delete, doesn't seem to be notable really. Stifle 10:07, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. A rather notable student organisation since the 1 July Parade. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 13:21, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable student organization involving in many high-profile political demonstrations. You can't test for notability through Google; many Chinese newspaper web sites now requires payment to read articles and/or expires very quickly.—Gniw (Wing) 18:02, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Considering the article has not been changed to show why the union is notable beyond it simply being a union, I think that it does not meet the notability requirements. I know that certain people have said that it has been involved in "high profile political demonstrations" and such, but the article does not show this. From what is in the article now, it only says that they organised one successful protest, and how successful (in changing policy or such) it was is unclear. dr.alf 05:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Why don't you do some research yourself, instead of saying that I have not edited the article (without even giving me time to go home first)? It takes hours just to do minor copyediting on this article, and I am supposed to be on Wikileave. With many references on Google having already expired or changed into paid content, perhaps you can help me find some non-expired English references. (Hint: HKSSU's site contain some valid references which are not even on Google, not even if I search in Google's Chinese site. Talk about "Google test" for notability; the "Google test" is invalid as a test for notability.)—Gniw (Wing) 08:23, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Have you tried the Chinese name, man? I think it's notable enough. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 08:29, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
      • Yes, that's what I did in the last few hours. Many newspaper articles have either expired or turned into paid content. Google's cache helps, but isn't useful for multi-page articles. I think it's notable enough too, but unfortunately this is the English Wikipedia, some people think that if it cannot be found on the Web in the English language then it is automatically non-notable.—Gniw (Wing)
        • I did try and find some info on the Union, but after an hour of searching Yahoo and Google, I came up with nothing except the wikipedia article. dr.alf 10:44, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
          • Have you tried the Chinese name. Of course you would find little about the body with the English name if the official language of the Union is Chinese. You should try again and you will see that more than 6000 articles would be found. -- Jerry Crimson Mann 20:17, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
            • I did, and I got a lot of hits, but they are totally useless. I don't know any chinese so I dont know what the different pages say. dr.alf 03:24, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. It is a good org. -- User:RockLi 17:22, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • User's very first edit. --Nlu (talk) 09:27, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Wikipdia is not for nonsense. (I'm from Hong Kong) --minghong 04:09, 11 December 2005 (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.