Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dave Dai


 * 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   delete. JohnCD (talk) 17:30, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Dave Dai

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Declined speedy - While it sounds like the subject of this article has a borderline (at best) claim of notability per WP:BIO, the article is unsourced and I cannot find anything to verify the notability claims Nick—Contact/Contribs 00:30, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Snow delete per WP:BIO. He's notable because he works somewhere? Sometimes I wish WP:N wasn't so broad. Erpert (let's talk about it) 06:40, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I declined the speedy not 'because he works somewhere', but because it makes this claim to notability: he has received recognition and ranking in various public polls including Asiamoney and Institutional Investors. I also noted that there were references both at Google News as 'Dave Dai' and at Google News Archive as 'Dave Dai' as well as under '戴维'. However, all of these appear to be basically saying "Dave Dai, a spokesman for CLSA, said..." (As I can't read Chinese, I can't verify the Chinese-language ones, but the few I Google Translated seemed to be the same) However, '戴维' appears to be just 'David', it seems from one of the Google News results that '戴大卫' would be David Dai, so I would appreciate any comment from a Chinese-reading editor. As it stands, with no evidence found of any awards from AsiaMoney Magazine (no mentions at asiamoney.com), and 'Institutional Investors' I assume to be Institutional Investor Magazine, whose website iimagazine.com makes no mention of him. With no significant coverage of him as an individual, and no evidence of any recognition/awards, I feel that this article should be deleted. --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 08:51, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe that came out wrong. I wasn't trying to insult you. Erpert (let's talk about it) 17:33, 16 March 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries, I didn't take it as an insult! Also, Boing (below): that was my thought initially, but as AsiaMoney is a magazine, I thought II might be too. If it isn't, then there is even less chance of it being a notable award or anything like that! --  Phantom Steve / talk &#124; contribs \ 17:37, 16 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: "Institutional investors" is a generic term meaning institutions that invest - investment banks, funds, insurance companies, etc, so it could be referring to anything. -- Boing!   said Zebedee  15:24, 16 March 2010 (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.