Talk:Jack Hui

Reasons to keep the article "Jack Hui"
1. The argument provided by user Cyktsui to delete this page is that the case is only suspected. However, the nature of the case is clearly stated in the article: "Hui pleaded not guilty in the first trial on January 12, 2007 and the judge granted a request to delay the trial so that Hui could sit for the Hong Kong Advanced Level Examination.". There is no defamatory, only attributable facts.

2. The subject in question is sufficiently notable, not only because of his suspected indecent assault case, but also his achievement. Googling his Chinese name will result in tons of verifiable information.

3. The article is neutral and independent (As a matter of fact, I don't know Mr.Hui personally) but I know more about him because of the reports of his case from the mass media.

4. The article is informative, and well sourced.

That's all, thanks!. - INTELer 17:39, 8 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I am not saying the article is POV, but it seems like Jack Hui is not significant enough as Wikipedia article. There are a large nubmer of people participated in IMO, with higher achievement, but not having their own article (not that they should). --Cyktsui 13:12, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I truly wonder why this article exists. Getting several medals in IMO is no doubt exceptionally yet it is not significant enough to be placed on wikipedia. There are simply too many medal winners in IMO history. For sexual assault, there are also many sexual assault cases every year, and I can't see any point of singling out this case and put it here even though it may be the talk of the town right now. 221.126.80.178 17:32, 15 May 2007 (UTC)


 * I suggest an election should be raised for the public to decide whether the article should be deleted or remains its existence in wikipedia, or to consult the AMA. WP:AMA, WP:DR. Narold 10:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)