Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yang Hong

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 delete. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 12:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Yang Hong

Yang Hong (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Article contains no references and fails to meet WP:BIO standards. Ozgod 02:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Unclear whether real, but even if real isn't notable enough. --Nlu (talk) 05:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletions. -- Black Falcon 07:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
• Comment Not sure if this person is real or not, but there is a class of ships called the Xiang Yang Hong. I do not know Chinese, but if that means the class of ships was named after someone named Yang Hong, I'd say some article is warranted. Mister.Manticore 10:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Without seeing the Chinese characters, my guess is that the class is named after the city of Xiangyang (襄陽, in modern Xiangfan, Hubei), not after this person. --Nlu (talk) 15:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
    • That is possible, but as I said, I don't know either way myself. Mister.Manticore 18:17, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
• keep and ask for sources. same as the others. DGG 02:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Doesn't appear to be a major figure. Will investigate further tonight. Shimeru 19:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Delete, just as Shimeru my memory is not so good anymore, I'll check for sources Alf^Photoman 21:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Unclear notability, plus very poor quality. Meaningful username 11:31, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mgm|^(talk) 13:58, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Does not emphasise notability Jammy Simpson | Talk | 14:20, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
• Weak delete. The article appears to be describing someone livivig around the 150CE period, so they have survived the test of time. However, without sources this article provides no context or details to base notability on. Nuttah68 14:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I agree with the above that unless this person is truely notable then it should be deleted. To say the person has stood the test of time, not much has been said in this article, and if he is truely notworthy then there should be plenty of info by which to make an article on --PrincessBrat 16:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
• merge as I hope was done for the others. The nom should know by now that the characters in this group are in a major work of historical fiction, but based on real history & are thus to be judged on both aspects. (its only necessary to follow the links to find this out) Quite a lot of them a=have come up at AfD, and the obvious solution is for someone knowledgeable in the period to merge the minor ones appropriates, as is done with other works of fiction and some minor personages in history. I myself cannot say how important she is in the history or the novel, or just how it should be merged. DGG 02:35, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • The Romance of Three Kingdoms has so many minor characters that it is, I feel, not worth it to merge really minor characters, and there is really nothing else to merge to. --Nlu (talk) 07:24, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Comment The article was created by an editor who has been blocked indefinitely (the list of deleted articles is approaching 800). I don't know if this one is a copyright violation or not, but if it is, it doesn't need an AfD debate. Fg2 08:06, 5 March 2007 (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.