Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darius Cheung

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 05:59, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Darius Cheung

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

The firm isn't notable and neither is he. Part of a promotional campaign for a number of inter-related articles see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/99.co. Trivial awards, and the res are promotional notices about them. DGG ( talk ) 13:20, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - the listed sources are unconvincing, and I couldn't find anything more convincing in a basic BEFORE - David Gerard (talk) 14:22, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as I also opined for Delete at the other article, and I would've also nominated this had I noticed it existed, because, like with the company, the sources and information sinply empathize what they want to advertise about themselves, and it's clear simply by the contents and environment of them, thst it was simply churnalism news, not substance. SwisterTwister talk 16:42, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is part of an extensive promotional campaign. The sources are thin, they usually quote the person or talk about the company. I prefer solid coverage about the subject and this is missing here. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 21:43, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

David Gerard, DGG, SwisterTwister I have reason to believe Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roshni Mahtani is also part of this same series. The article subjects are closely related, and the article seems to have been created by someone affiliated (similar writing style and some offline knowledge as well). It seems there are more entries here though. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 21:53, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. Lemongirl942 (talk) 21:58, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a non-notable businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:35, 7 October 2016 (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.