Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anna Guo


 * 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, per WP:BIO #1. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Anna Guo

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Is this musician sufficiently notable? While she's on the National Geographic and Allmusic Web sites, I don't see sufficient notability. Delete --Nlu (talk) 15:16, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.   --  Beloved  Freak  15:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   --  Beloved  Freak  15:38, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Unless more sources show up to demonstrate notability. The National Geographic link is just a very short bio of her.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:00, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Per WP:N TheAsianGURU (talk) 19:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 22:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep When NatGeo has your biography on its site, you are notable. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - This is premature as the AFDer did not take the necessary time or courtesy to inform the creator of the article (perhaps s/he has more detailed information about this artist). Badagnani (talk) 00:53, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The fact that this editor makes an optional notification supposedly mandatory shows that this keep vote is disruptive. For one thing, I came across this article while pruning the category into subcategories.  If I have to notify everyone on every one of these, I'd get nothing done.  --Nlu (talk) 03:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * It's nice to be informed and the polite thing to do, but it's true it's not precisely required. I made this when I was trying to expand Wikipedia coverage on world/Non-Western music. It's been a bit then. Anyway when you do a Google Search for "yang-qin" (granted a variant transliteration) with "musician" Anna Guo is one of the main names you get. She's apparently been in the Canadian news and toured internationally. I don't remember how strict Notability (music) is though so whatever y'all decide is best I suppose. I'm a "he" by the way, the "T" stands for "Thomas."--T. Anthony (talk) 08:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Or you can do a Google search to see what other references are available. Deletion means you searched and coudn't find any more references, not that the article doesn't have enough. A tag would have sufficed. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 04:00, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Qualifies per criteria 1 of WP:MUSIC. She has been the subject of non-trivial mention in independent publications like this and this in addition to the sources already provided in the article. Given that we're discussing a performer outside any mainstream music genre, I think it is rather notable that she has even merit an entry on such a mainstream site as Allmusic. Also strongly agree with Richard Arthur Norton. If an article does not indicate notability but there's a possibility that the subject might be notable, then the proper thing to do is to tag the article with notability instead of nominating it for deletion and then asking us other editors Is this musician sufficiently notable? You should already be convinced that the subject is non-notable before nominating the article for deletion. --Bardin (talk) 08:08, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - passes notability guidelines with significant coverage in reliable sources. Perhaps, before rushing to delete, we should be trying a little harder with articles like these in the name of countering systemic bias. I'm not saying change the rules for non-Western subjects, let's just look that little bit further before assuming lack of notability. (Not directed at anyone in particular, just my own little rant...)-- Beloved Freak  23:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Quite notable, and a poster child for why WP:BIAS is such an important project. Chubbles (talk) 20:49, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * In fairness User:Nlu has apparently worked on a good deal of Chinese and Taiwanese articles. So it's plausibly not ignorance of Chinese stuff so much as disdain for the more music/pop-culture side of Wikipedia. And I'd be happy to do more articles on people from the Tang dynasty instead, it's just those harder to get information about.--T. Anthony (talk) 23:37, 18 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - How does that explain why Nlu attempted to delete Abing, an article on the musician the PRC regards to be the quintessential folk musician of the 20th century? Please take a look at that AFD, then possibly modify your comment just above. Badagnani (talk) 00:42, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Well to repeat "so much as disdain for the more music/pop-culture side of Wikipedia." I'm saying he or she may feel, wrongly I agree, that very few musicians are of encyclopedic value so they rarely merit entries in Wikipedia. Nie Er or Jiang Wen-Ye might not be okay, but less known than that uh-uh.--T. Anthony (talk) 00:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Disdain for music or pop culture is hardly a valid reason to flood the afd board with eight different nominations on Chinese performers, of which only one - Chek Yui Hong - merits deletion. All the others clearly qualifies as notable: Qiao Qiao, Siqing Lu, Yihan Chen, Wan Xiaoli, Abing, Qiu Xia He and this Anna Guo. The nominator has also repeatedly expressed uncertainty as to the notability of these performers, making such questions and comments as "Is this musician sufficiently notable?" and "Was this musician notable? I think it's a tough call, but I'd say no." If the nominator is uncertain, the notability tag should have been sufficient. The scary thing is that these articles could have easily been deleted given that a couple of other voters were all too quick to vote delete on some of these articles merely based on the nominator's word despite the strong grounds for notability that later voters like Richard Arthur Norton, BelovedFreak, Chubbles and myself made. --Bardin (talk) 07:16, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Oh I agree that s/he should've went for a notability tag if uncertain. I'm hoping he'll withdraw some of them.--T. Anthony (talk) 07:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)


 * 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.