Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenny Sia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Mailer Diablo 01:33, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kenny Sia

Delete ... self-advertisement. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.209.241.37 (talk) 11:45, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Contested speedy, talk page makes some claims to notability, rather take the safe road and AfD it. Tawker 07:30, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Comment talk page states similarity in ranking to Maddox (alexa:7,369) & Tucker Max (alexa:5,661). Kenny Sia (alexa:57,015) nowhere near them. Traffic only seems to have picked up on the site in late 2005. —porges(talk) 08:06, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Alexa is not always a great indicator and besides he was talking about popularity relative to the region, not overall. A cursory glance at his blog showed each post getting dozens of comments. Most blogs get no comments. I'd like to hear from some people from SE Asia who might know a little more. — GT 08:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Richardcavell 12:17, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep, he's as popular as Xiaxue. See [1] and [2] for a guage of his popularity. Lastly, 193,000 Ghits and the first few are all directly relevant. [3] Kimchi.sg | talk 13:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, a notable blogger in the Southeast Asian region. --Terence Ong 16:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep by precedent, seems notable enough compared to other bloggers with Wik pages --Deville (Talk) 16:22, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment please pay attention to the below quote, from policy, not guidelines. Then read WP:RS. —porges(talk) 20:38, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
we only publish material that is verifiable with reference to reliable, published sources — WP:V
The Urban Wire (my 2nd reference) is a independent, published newsletter. Kimchi.sg | talk 00:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
  • I then cast my vote as keep, and add the sources to the article :) (I meant to point out that notability is not as much of a concern as verifiability.) —porges(talk) 00:14, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. He's a notable blogger in the Malaysian blogosphere (and to an extent, Singapore's blogosphere too), mentioned in the newspapers a few times before. The Star even published one of his blog posts about half a year ago. Definitely notable. --Andylkl [ talk! | c ] 07:18, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Andylk. --Srikeit(talk ¦ ✉) 00:48, 3 May 2006 (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.