Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cho Min


 * 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 Move to Cho Min academic credentials scandal. There is a clear consensus that Cho Min herself is not notable, although the scandal is. Since we're split on whether this is better covered in its own article or as a section in the article about Cho Kuk, I'll move this for now, without prejudice against a merge discussion on the talk page as the article gets reworked. – bradv  🍁  15:47, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Cho Min

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article needs to be scrutinized, in particular with regard to WP:BLP, whether its subject has independent of her father encyclopedic notability. Ymblanter (talk) 08:57, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Ymblanter (talk) 08:57, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions. Ymblanter (talk) 08:57, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:10, 1 February 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy ping to, , , , who participated alongside Koraskadi and myself in a relevant merge discussion that had gone stale before this AfD was opened. signed,Rosguill talk 18:27, 3 February 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete and redirect to her father per WP:CRIME "A person who is known only in connection with a criminal event or trial should not normally be the subject of a separate Wikipedia article if there is an existing article that could incorporate the available encyclopedic material relating to that person." Her only claim to independent notability appears to be her falsified credentials; otherwise, as an ordinary medical student, it would be far WP:TOOSOON for notability through research contributions. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:07, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, merge and redirect to Cho Kuk as the reason for notability is through falsifying achievements. Taewangkorea (talk) 04:07, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete fraudlent claims of doing things are not so rare as to make one notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:32, 2 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a major case of fraud that will have lasting impact on Korean society, especially in education, and is comparable to Hwang Woo-suk, Chung Yoo-ra and Shin Jeong-ah. Many of the issues involved are still in an on-going basis, with more information coming from the trial and her fraudulent college admissions. There are many repurcussions surrounding this person, and if the article is deleted, it would be difficult to add new information as this matter progresses. Koraskadi (talk) 18:12, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Cho_Kuk, which should make it easy enough for people to continue adding developing coverage to Wikipedia. If the section gets so long as to be unwieldy, or starts to include information with no relevance to Kuk, an article can be split off again. signed,Rosguill talk 18:24, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. I raised concerns with this article back in November; Koraskadi's comment above only serves to highlight the fact that it's the case which is notable, not the person, and even then it seems largely due to her father's involvement. WP:ONEEVENT and WP:PSEUDO both seem to apply here. PC78 (talk) 19:11, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Cho_Kuk, for reasons outlined above by Rosguill. Skeletor3000 (talk) 17:25, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Move to Cho Min academic credentials scandal. As points out, the scandal itself is notable as attested by the multitude of reliable sources covering it. As a topic it is ill-suited to be covered in full in either a biography of Cho Min or Cho Kuk because it is about a conspiracy between the two of them and its societal impact. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 19:36, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Endorse If Keep is not viable, then I agree with this course of action, creating an article on the event itself. 13:18, 13 February 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koraskadi (talk • contribs)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   20:31, 8 February 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   21:40, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 22:38, 15 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep per GNG or merge to new article about the scandal, per the sheer volume of articles and videos about her. —МандичкаYO 😜 11:46, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge and/or move as is reasonable. There's clearly a major scandal here, with plenty of reliable sources, and notoriety can be the basis of notability. Bearian (talk) 16:42, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep and Move to Cho Min academic credentials scandal. Per above points, the scandal is notable by the reliable sources covering it. Best Idolmm (talk) 08:08, 23 February 2020 (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.