Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Wong Tape


 * 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   no consensus. J04n(talk page) 18:31, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Benjamin Wong Tape
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article does not appear to meet notability requirements. See Notability_(people) Note 7. There is only one web page mentioning this person and I can't find any other articles elsewhere Earlopogous 20:25, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Insufficient claim of notability. No evidence of support for notability in multiple reliable secondary sources.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 20:38, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment This is actually quite a complicated one. Firstly, the source quoted is the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography.  This is a very significant secondary source, not simply a random webpage.  The chosen subjects are all deemed notable for inclusion by a selection committee.  It is the New Zealand equivalent to the Dictionary of National Biography, and I have seen previous people kept at AfD for simply having being mentioned in that source alone.  There does also appear to be some other, somewhat limited, coverage including in this book and a few lines in this article and this book.  (note that all are by the same author, though).  There is also strong indications of offline sources being in existence, especially his papers, which are held in the Hocken Library.  (Libraries/Archives do not accept just anything given to them, the documents and the subject both have to be deemed notable enough to be kept and catalogued).  He is also mentioned in numerous contemporary newspaper accounts, especially surrounding controversial comments he made about missionaries.  Finally, the claims of his achievements in the biography also suggest that offline source on him are more likely than not to exist, including his role as "a founder of the University of Hong Kong" (I am puzzled by this claim and the corresponding lack of sources to back it up, a clarification of exactly what "a founder" means would be helpful.  Was it just some money he put up, did he sit on a minor board of some sort, or was he far more active?), a translator in New Zealand, being awarded the OBE, being a Justice of the Peace of Hong Kong and sitting on the Urban Council, Hong Kong.  Yes none of these alone automatically qualify for notability, but taken together they do present a strong argument. I imagine there may be sources in Cantonese in existence and would ask any Cantonese speakers to have a quick search.  It is a very hard call to make, but the totality of the evidence, the likelihood of offline sources, the interest by a respected Chinese-New Zealand scholar and his inclusion in the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography all have me leaning towards the opinion of weak keep, though another in-depth secondary source would be a great asset.   Ravendrop 22:02, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy close He's listed in the Dictionary of New Zealand Biography for being a notable merchant, and that in itself establishes notability. Yes, there might not be much on the internet about him, but that's not a requirement for notability. Given that Patricia Lim has gone to the effort and transcribed his headstone, I would very much expect that he's included in her 2011 book. I've expanded the article so that it now represents a useful bio.  Schwede 66  22:08, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Don't erase this Tape (even if he is Wong). An entry in the Dictionary is sufficient in itself. "B. Wong Tape" is mentioned in passing in Edge of Empires: Chinese Elites and British Colonials in Hong Kong as "a New Zealand-educated insurance magnate". Clarityfiend (talk) 00:13, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I have access to a physical copy of this book, but only during the working week, I'll expand the article with this content next week. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:20, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Inclusion in the New Zealand biographical registry shows notability. The deletion arguments boil down to too much reliance on recent sources and would lead to even more over representation of living people at the cost of the past than we already have.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:20, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment There seems to be consensus to keep this article. Could someone, however, clarify for me why this meets notability requirements that a person who is 'part of the enduring historical record' will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books on that field, by historians." Using this requirement, I don't think the article meets the requirements because Wong Tape is only talked about "in depth" in the DNZB (all other citations are only in passing). I do understand that the failure to find other citations might be a result of systemic bias, and therefore treating everyone in the DNZB as notable is a way to counter systemic bias. I look forward to hearing other views on this. Thanks! Earlopogous 19:25, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
 * As the article creator, the best explanation I have that this stub was created as part of the core work of WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles and the consensus of WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles and WikiProject New Zealand has always been that everyone with a single-person article entry in the DNZB is notable (See this discussion and this). There are a number of people in the DNZB which I balked at and didn't create articles for, typically partnerships of one kind or another.  A number of DNZB articles have come up for AfD (Elizabeth Mackay, Hone Taiapa), and I believe none have been deleted, thanks in large part to the efforts of WikiProject New Zealand members. A number have been speedied without notification, only a few of which I've had time to get undeleted and improved. Note that I'm not !voting here, just presenting dicussions that have already taken place. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:43, 9 April 2013 (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.