Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/14 Nam Cheong Street


 * 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 keep. The provided sources are on the sparse side, but have not been substantially challenged. Vanamonde (Talk) 12:37, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

14 Nam Cheong Street

 * – ( View AfD View log )

WP:RUNOFTHEMILL building with no claim to notability. Geschichte (talk) 22:37, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 23:22, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 23:23, 19 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete: The theories' source doesn't lead to any info. This address is for a renovated apartment building that was once a tong lau, but there is no significant coverage of it. All I could find were a mention of it here and articles like this stating that it was once a tong lau. I added the address to the Tong lau list, but it fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NBUILD. Heartmusic678 (talk) 17:44, 20 August 2021 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  From Google Translate: "The predecessor of Weiqun Apartment was actually a two-story triangular tenement building. By 1964, a six-story apartment was built. It is said that due to title issues, it has been lost for nearly 20 years. By 2015, Defu Development Co., Ltd., owned by the founder of Mascotte Chen Ailing, purchased a group of apartments for approximately HK$34.6 million."  From Google Translate: "The entire old building at No. 14 Nanchang Street, Sham Shui Po, which was completed more than half a century ago, was just purchased by Chen Ailing, founder of Mascotte Group, for about 34.6 million yuan, which is expected to be worthy of reconstruction. ... The site area of the property is about 835 square feet. It is currently a six-storey triangular building with a curved corner tower design. It was completed in 1964. ... The site was originally owned by the invisible rich man Ma Shutou in Kowloon City. It was purchased for 6 million yuan in 1991 and was auctioned for 8.2 million yuan in 2000 but no one bid."  From Google Translate: "Huihao Residence is one of the few existing corner-shaped curved tenement houses in Hong Kong. Before the 1980s, there were still wharves in Sham Shui Po. At that time, the building owners used the 4th floor and below as short-term rental apartments for rent. Since most of the tenants were singles, they were known as "Sanzai Pavilion" (Sanzai refers to bachelors). The highest two-story unit is rented out as a cubicle room, with relatively rudimentary internal equipment. The late Alice Lam Chui Lin (zh:林翠蓮), a former member of the Eastern District Council of Hong Kong, lived here when she was young. In the late 1980s, the terminal was shut down and the major owner passed away. The building began to be emptied in the 1990s due to ownership issues. It was only in recent years that the consortium bought it and refurbished it."   <li></li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow 14 Nam Cheong Street ( and ) to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 10:51, 22 August 2021 (UTC) </li></ul> <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I don't see the significance carried by those quotes, other than they confirm the building meets WP:V; it exists. Geschichte (talk) 18:57, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:54, 26 August 2021 (UTC)

Delete The reason for notability is not asserted. The person who claims that it is notable should mention it on the article. Wasraw (talk) 05:47, 27 August 2021 (UTC)
 * "The person who claims that it is notable should mention it on the article": that would be useful but there is no such rule. Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 20:23, 27 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep thanks to the sources shared above by Cunard. WP:MILL is an essay and subjective. I believe this passes WP:GNG. NemesisAT (talk) 16:56, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep The level of coverage that Cunard has uncovered shows that this building is likely not WP:ROTM. The generic apartment building does not get significant coverage in national papers over a 7 year period. Jumpytoo Talk 21:19, 29 August 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.