Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chua Sha

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 no consensus. (non-admin closure)  ^B E _C K ^Y _S A ^{Y L} E _S  00:22, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please note: article now at Chuan Sha (actual name). --Andreas Philopater (talk) 23:55, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chua Sha (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Procedural nomination. This was an AFC draft declined long ago by User:Alexrexpvt due to concerns about notability, though User:DGG indicated that the author might be notable because his work was included in a major anthology. I moved the draft to mainspace and am nominating for deletion, which will hopefully attract more knowledgeable editors. I personally am leaning toward a weak delete, given that this Chinese author has lived in Toronto since 1999, and one would expect there to be more news articles about him in the English-language press since then if he were notable. Calliopejen1 (talk) 21:32, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The criterion for short story writers has generally been inclusion in a major anthology. Whether there will be stories in the english language press would depend upon whether he writes in Chinese or in English, and that is not clear from the article. Unfortunate the article here is mainly a copy of this external reference, though it could be argued that the list of works does not have the originality to come under copyright. DGG ( talk ) 21:54, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 21:55, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I've moved it to Chuan Sha, since that's the name given in the article and the filename of the photo. It's also the name used on his blog. Leaning to keep, since Language for a New Century is a major anthology and one of his poems is in it. It isn't easy to find relevant stuff on Google because his name is a homonym of a suburb of Shanghai. I wouldn't expect coverage of him in the English-language press, because he doesn't write in English. The Canadian Chinese-language press does have something. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 23:35, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And here he is in China Daily USA --Andreas Philopater (talk) 23:59, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I can't comment on any Chinese-language coverage, but the China Daily USA piece is just quoting him as a member of the local Chinese community, not covering his writing. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:09, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hence my edit summary. They are, though, quoting him as somehow representative of the Chinese community in Canada (not as a protester exactly). --Andreas Philopater (talk) 00:14, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Before you made your comment, I revised my comment (after re-reading the article). Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:16, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:11, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:28, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:28, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The sources I've found establish the subject as a real poet, dramatist and novelist active in the Chinese community in Toronto, but fall short of establishing that he meets the notability guideline for creative professionals. As things stand, the decision would seem to hinge on the assertion made by DGG above that inclusion in a major anthology can be taken to establish notability. If this is a good rule of thumb, the article should be kept. If not, do we just keep relisting until somebody with sufficient Chinese turns up to comment? --Andreas Philopater (talk) 10:11, 3 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.