Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruno Wu


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 11:38, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Bruno Wu

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Article about a run-of-the-mill billionaire that fails to cite reliable sources and only recites his resume. All mentions in reliable sources that I can find are announcements about the company Ideanomics. FalconK (talk) 05:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. FalconK (talk) 05:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. FalconK (talk) 05:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. FalconK (talk) 05:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. FalconK (talk) 05:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete per source assessment table above. CAVETOWNFAN (talk) 14:11, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.  The article has 307 words of independent biographical background about Bruno Wu before it prints a non-independent interview of him. 307 words of biographical background is significant coverage.    <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> <li> The article has 366 words of independent biographical background about Bruno Wu before it prints a non-independent interview of him. 366 words of biographical background is significant coverage.</li> <li></li> <li></li> <li></li> </ol>There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Bruno Wu to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 02:23, 25 January 2021 (UTC)</li></ul>
 * Keep, he seems notable to me. Davidgoodheart (talk) 14:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes GNG per the sources provided by Cunard. Best, VocalIndia (talk) 15:41, 25 January 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.