Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Ong Teck Chin

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page, if it exists; or after the end of this archived section. The result of the debate was ambiguous.

I count 10 "deletes", 7 "keeps" and one too ambiguous to call. I'll add my own vote that I do not believe he meets the recommended criteria for inclusion of biographies.

However, even with my own opinion, this fails to rise to the level of concensus necessary for deletion. I am going to close this as a "no concensus" decision. Rossami (talk) 8 July 2005 00:36 (UTC)

[edit] Dr Ong Teck Chin

This apparently is the principal of a school in Singapore. No further evidence of notability. Aecis 09:18, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete notability not established. JamesBurns 10:37, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Strong Keep. You don't realise do you? I'll add stuff later, I have been working on other articles, and not my school, but he's the incumbent principal of Anglo-Chinese School (Independent)...for those that don't know, this generally evokes gasps/awes among the Singaporean population, or at least on one's PSLE slip after graduating from primary school (for joy factor at least). Seeing how he's the one that's going to pioneer some radical programs, I think notability IS established. This is way too far, do you mind actually finding which schools happen to be prominent first, aka mentioned constantly in the Straits Times that is read by millions? Maybe you'd actually DO SOME RESEARCH, first? [1] [2] What's next, you're going to start deleting articles on our GRC ministers and electoral candidates just because its not documented on google? This is systemic bias at its worst, and intolerance of something that could change that, as well. Oh, something else, the school is uniquely (legally) a corporation, and he played a hand in that. -- Natalinasmpf 11:30, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • So what? School principals arent inherently notable. Hell, even associate professors and professors of larger universities get deleted on Wikipedia. The school maybe notable, but he isnt.. as I've said countless of times before - being associated with X does not make Y notable. The school isnt up for VfD - he is. JamesBurns 06:23, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, but this is basically the leader of a pioneering programme currently being comitted by the school, being responsible for a host of new things. FYI, he's the school's second principal, and considering generally how its advanced over the past decade, and how those improvements could be attributed to him....-- Natalinasmpf 06:27, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Calm down, natalina. I understand that you care about this subject, otherwise you wouldn't have created this article. But accusing users of systemic bias and intolerance won't get you far. The issue is not whether the Anglo-Chinese School is notable (I believe it is). The issue is also not whether dr. Ong Teck Chin has played an important role in the history of the school (I'm sure he has). The issue is whether that makes him notable enough to be on Wikipedia. A major problem with this article is that it simply states that Dr. Ong Teck Chin is the principal of the ACS. No mention is made of all the valuable information you have posted here. Also keep in mind that three weeks have gone by since the creation of this article. In that period of time, there have been no serious edits to this article, only some minor copyediting and some stub-tagging. That's it. That of course doesn't make Dr. Ong Teck Chin non-notable, but it doesn't plead in his advantage either. This article doesn't give a shred of proof of notability. Aecis 11:59, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) (PS. Planning to do something doesn't make someone notable, it's doing something that makes someone notable.)

• Delete until more information is given. I have no doubt Dr Chin is notable but why have an article that just says he was appointed in 1994. This is an insult to Dr Chin and the readers of Wikipedia. It would have taken very little effort to include the above information. Did you put this sub stub on just so you could put another notch on your belt to say how many articles you had 'written'? --Porturology 11:46, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Comment. I wrote it because I didn't want a red link, not to "put a notch on my belt". Note, I boast very little on my user page, maybe counting all the articles you write is something you do. I myself isn't a student of ACS(I), I was expecting Wikipedians who go to that school (which I think there are two or three) to write up about it. I will include more information when I finish writing some other articles first. -- Natalinasmpf 12:01, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• • If you didnt want a red link then dont create a link. The red links aren't there for article creation - they're there because someone was sloppy enough not to preview their article and remove the link before submitting an article. JamesBurns 06:23, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete School principal. No claim to notability given in article. Google (76 hits) reveals nothing that couldn't be said of any other school principal on the planet. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:09, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Did you read anything? Its far more than 76, and furthermore, does "any other school principal" teach in three NATIONAL universities, most notably in the medical faculty, administrate a school like a corporation in addition to the style as an academic institution, be a pioneer of reform in an Asian education system (which is noted for rigidity and high stress) and a principal of the school that won the Odyssey of the Mind competition in 2002, as well as a host of other NATIONAL DISTINCTIONS? CAN YOU ACTUALLY DO SOME RESEARCH FIRST? Furthermore, google is not omniscient - and actually there are a bunch of other pages that mention him, but their robots.txt prevent google from indexing it. -- Natalinasmpf 22:33, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Give him a mention on Anglo-Chinese School. --Xcali 15:28, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, as per Xcali.--Nabla 16:50, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)
• Delete and mention in school article, unless article author wishes to expand article at least enough to make a plausible claim of notability for the subject. --FCYTravis 17:58, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Can't you be more patient? I was inevitably going to work on it, you deletionists. And here it is, and more to come, how far does this have to go? -- Natalinasmpf 21:28, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• I must say that this is the best improvement of a VfD'ed article I've ever seen. The article itself is now definitely up to Wikipedia standards. I'm still not convinced of Ong Teck Chin's notability though. I don't know what can convince me either. If this article indeed will be deleted, I hope that the content will first be added to Natalina's user talk page or somewhere else. This is too much of an improvement to go by unnoticed. Aecis 22:24, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Patient? Well, you've got five days until the vote actually closes to make the improvements. I don't think voting delete until improved is being impatient. Oh yeah, zomg, im a deletionist, I'm eeeeeeeeevil. --FCYTravis 23:50, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Delete, not Thomas Arnold. Dunc|☺ 19:15, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Comment. What about this page? (See bottom). [3] PLEASE TAKE A LOOK AT THE NEW VERSION, NOT THE OLD.

• Move to Ong Teck Chin, as having Dr. in the title is, I believe, against our naming conventions.--Scimitar 22:06, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Done. -- Natalinasmpf 22:12, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Move to Ong Teck Chin --GrandCru 23:54, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. ALSO NOTE ALL THE REFERENCES I HAVE CITED. IS THIS ENOUGH FOR SOMEONE TO BE SENSIBLE AND ACTUALLY REMOVE THE BLOODY "NO REFERENCES" TAG FROM THE PAGE? This is way too far. How many references have I cited, and how many things must I add, and you still want to delete it?! -- Natalinasmpf 22:51, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I don't know exactly how far a principal has to go to become notable but it seems to me that the article establishes that he is more notable than an average principal. Playing into my judgement, to some degree, is that the author has over 500 edits in the last week and seems to have a very good grasp of what Wikipedia is about. For me to sit here in Chicago and say that a principal is not notable is very difficult. Here, the former head of the Chicago Public Schools was so notable that he ran a very viable campaign for governor in the last Democratic primary. Wikipedia is not paper and I think we have a new bytes to spare for Dr. Chin. DS1953 00:05, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Dr. Ong, you mean. Its a Chinese name, the surname comes first. ;-) -- Natalinasmpf 00:08, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Weak Delete - after schools the flood of teachers - Skysmith 09:00, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - its hardly a flood of teachers. I mean, its not just any principal either. Did you bother to check out the references? -- Natalinasmpf 09:09, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
    • No, not this article. Modifying vote, could need clarification - Skysmith 09:45, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Weak Keep. Not an average principal, and I really don't think principal's on the whole should be included, but he seems notable. --Scimitar 14:01, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep notable principal of notable school. -- Vsion 04:27, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Keep per DS1953, fixing article title as appropriate. Jgm 29 June 2005 04:58 (UTC)
• Weak Keep, I see no birthdates. Mr Tan 29 June 2005 06:17 (UTC)
• Weak Keep After reviewing print and online documentation, appears to have an unusual constellation of personal achievements including 'Best Actor' in the local Youth Festival, several military awards, a PhD in Biochemistry and a Rhodes scholarship. Autolycus 30 June 2005
• Delete. I've discovered Wikipedia fairly recently and, coming from Singapore myself, I was surprised and interested to discover this article about Dr. Ong Teck Chin at its consideration for deletion. I agree with what's been said above about being the principal of a well-known school not being sufficient criteria for an entry in an encylopaedia, unless the circumstances are exceptional. I think this article as it currently exists is very biased and reflects the propaganda at this school (and supportive elements in the press) would like people to believe rather than the reality. ACS (Independent) was not the first school in Singapore to introduce a 4-year integrated programme. It was the first local school to take a firm decision to use the International Baccalaureate, but others are considering this too. Deciding to use the IB is not as "pioneering" as this article makes out. It's a major international exam curriculum which has been used at schools around the world for decades, including at a number of the international schools in Singapore. Fundraising is something all schools in Singapore do, and that independent schools particularly try to push. The school's achievements in these areas are not that remarkable. If this article is kept, people associated with all the other leading schools in Singapore (and probably many other schools around the world) will be encouraged to also put trumped-up articles about their principals in this encyclopaedia. Singopo 6 July 2005

• Checking with IBO shows that this is the first Singapore-system school to be authorised to use the IB Diploma Programme. Suggest you tone down the inflammatory rhetoric (e.g. 'trumped-up') and be more concise as to your grounds of objection. Brythain 6 July 2005
  • I know it's the first local-system school in Singapore to adopt the IB (I already noted that above). But that in itself is not a "pioneering" move. A number of other schools in Singapore are also considering doing so. This article currently implies that Dr. Ong is responsible for doing something revolutionary, and in my opinion that is "trumping-up" his significance. Singopo 6 July 2005
    • It's the first such school to be authorised in Singapore. Not pioneering enough? To clarify, it is the first local-system school in Singapore (known internationally for its education system) to actually offer its students a different terminal qualification from the GCE-Cambridge system (as opposed to 'considering' doing so). Considering that every single one of the other 179 Singapore secondary schools and junior colleges offers GCE terminal qualifications, this is revolutionary enough, surely.Brythain 7 July 2005
      • The school was not the first to start a 4-year integrated programme, just the first to choose to have the students sit IB instead of A-Level exams at the end of it. I DO think that's significant enough to note on the page about the school on Wikipedia. But I DON'T think it's enough to mean that its principal merits an individual page in an international encyclopaedia. Singopo 7 July 2005 14:55 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be placed on a related article talk page, if one exists; in an undeletion request, if it does not; or below this section.