Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheng Yong (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  Wifione  Message 15:46, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Cheng Yong
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

The article was last AfDed and deleted in March. It was then recreated, and I don't think enough notability was shown, although it is close. Delete, and if this time the consensus is again to delete it, I suggest salting it. --Nlu (talk) 17:56, 14 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:42, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:45, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 13:09, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Delete I think we can delete this for now. Despite an artnet bio, I still think this young artist has a little bit of time to go before meeting WP:GNG. SarahStierch (talk) 22:40, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 21:56, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Weak keep but major overhaul is needed'., I would say this one barely passes the GNG.  Paolo  Napolitano  13:26, 5 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Paolo  Napolitano  13:39, 5 February 2012 (UTC)


 * keep per PaoloNapolitano, also bearing in mind that it tends to be hard to find Chinese sources on the internet (or, come to think about it, off the internet). The stuff that Paolo found makes for no more than a very weak keep, if there were nothing more, but in this case, another likely scenario is that there is more, but we can't find it. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 10:49, 6 February 2012 (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.