Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Before Dawn


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:17, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Before Dawn

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

'''Does not appear to reach the threshold of notability. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 17:15, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:57, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:57, 7 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: Possible sources are in need of translation.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:26, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: I will translate, but I need a few days. TBH, I can't help but think that cultural differences has clouded this AfD. Nothing against the nominators, of course. This is a Hong Kong show, which will mean nothing to anyone outside of the Asian community... Kiteinthewind  Leave a message! 02:42, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The assist with translation is much appreciated. My thought is that notability to the Asian community in Hong Kong, should be notable enough for en.Wikipedia. Any unfortunate and unintended  systemic bias, whether due to language or culture or location, is to be addressed whenever possible.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 04:51, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * User:MichaelQSchmidt: There is no bias in this nomination and I resent your implication ("Any unfortunate and unintended systemic bias, whether due to language or culture or location, is to be addressed whenever possible") to the contrary. As far your assertion that "that notability to the Asian community in Hong Kong, should be notable enough for en.Wikipedia", that would be an opinion, not a guideline. Rms125a@hotmail.com (talk) 11:04, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * User:Rms125a@hotmail.com Agreed... the nomination does not reflect any personal bias, and nothing in my comment implied that it did. My comment was toward the recognized bias that unfortunately exists within the system, and one of the reasons WP:CSB was created.  Even you might be able to grant that for editors not able to read Chinese, it would be impossible to determine if notability existed or not. And when all apparent available sources are in Chinese, it is reasonable to request translation, and I am glad that Kiteinthewind has above offered to assist.   And if notability can be sourced in Asia and in non-English sources, that would indeed be notable enough for en.Wikipedia... and that is guideline.... and not personal opinion.  So please do not assume bad faith when no insult is made nor intended. And note... I have not myself yet opined a keep or delete, as I do not read Chinese.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:40, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shimeru (talk) 21:03, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (t) (c) 18:32, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Relisting to allow some additional time for translation of potential sources. Shimeru (talk) 21:05, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete - could not find independent reliable sources to establish notability. Granted it's not easy with a title that is a pair of common words and sources may be available only in a foreign language, but authors of such stub articles should be prepared to back up notability claims with at least one solid reference, which is not the case here. Would retract if Kiteinthewind or anyone else provided translation of Chinese sources with suitable reliability.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 18:47, 22 April 2010 (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.