Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Newham


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Logan Talk Contributions 01:57, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Daniel Newham

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Doesn't appear to be especially notable, sources provided only mention him in passing Jac 16888  Talk 18:19, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:59, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:00, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:00, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Although English language sources are scarce, the New York Times called him a "popular television personality in China" which is a strong assertion of notability that creates a presumption that more in-depth sources exist in the Chinese language.  The article needs attention from a Chinese-speaking editor.  Chinese language sources are fine for this article. Cullen328 (talk) 02:36, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - I concur with Cullen328. The NY Times and Chicago Tribune articles give enough indication that the person is notable, and sources would be available in the Chinese language.  The existence of these two English language sources provide the basic verifiability needed to satisfy a biography of a living person. -- Whpq (talk) 16:38, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep per Cullen328 – HXL's Roundtable  and  Record  21:06, 30 April 2011 (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.