Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emperor Entertainment Group


 * 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. Despite a lot of discussion there is a surprisingly clear consensus to delete these articles because of notability and promotionalism concerns. I assume, though, that a neutrally written single article about the group might be acceptable to many, and might be a basis for userfying some of this content in order to integrate what is relevant into the recreated main article.  Sandstein  19:23, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Emperor Entertainment Group

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a series of related articles created by what appears to be the same group of SPA editors (sockpuppets were confirmed for some recent edits but most of the suspicious ones are too old to check). All of these articles share the same poor sourcing and promotional language issues. In lieu of deletion, conversion to a redirect to Emperor Group might be a good alternative option.

Please see also Articles for deletion/New Media Group Holdings Limited, which is related. Yunshui 雲 水 07:57, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:18, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 12:18, 4 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - promotional. Deb (talk) 15:21, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete them all. There doesn't need to be any 'adspeak' for these to be recognised as a purely promotonal exercise put up by the group's PR people. New Media Group Holdings has already been speedied. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:38, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete these awful promotional pieces masquerading as articles. Rentier (talk) 17:08, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete all of them. Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion and is not an extension of this company's web platforms, WP:PROMO. All fail GNG, CORP, and CORPDEPTH. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 06:15, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Keep all per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Summary Any promotional issues can be handled through editing per Editing policy. The articles in general are neutrally written. Emperor Entertainment Group is the most promotional article but there are more neutral versions like this 2010 version to revert to. Here is my summary for each article nominated for deletion:  Emperor Entertainment Group was called "one of the biggest record and entertainment companies in Hong Kong" by Financial Times. Billboard called it "the city's premier entertainment conglomerate" and "Hong Kong's biggest stable of local artists". Its major singers and groups include Twins, Nicholas Tse, Joey Yung, David Tao, and Wang Chieh. Emperor Motion Pictures was called "one of the largest and most influential entertainment media investment companies in Hong Kong" by Xinhua News Agency. Variety said Emperor Motion Pictures "has well-established film production, investment and distribution operations". EMP has produced or distributed Let the Bullets Fly, The Sun Also Rises, To the Fore, Twins Mission, Ming Ming, The Drummer, The Viral Factor, CZ12, and The Great Magician. EMP brought the The Hunger Game films to Hong Kong. Emperor Capital Group Limited was founded in 1993 and started trading on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 2007. It received a lengthy profile in Bloomberg Businessweek titled "Every Stock Was a Buy to This Analyst Team, Then Shares Tanked". Its market value in 2016 was HK$3.9 billion. Emperor Watch & Jewellery was founded in 1942 and listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 2008. In 2007, the company had revenue of HK$1.56 billion and net profit of HK$159 million. It has received analysis from analysts from Cash Asset Management, Altruist Financial Group, and Fulbright Securities. <li>Emperor International Holdings in 2007 had a property portfolio with a total value of roughly HK$10 billion. In 1994, former Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke was appointed as a non-executive director. In 1994, Simon Yeung, an analyst with Daiwa Institute of Research, said Emperor "had not commanded investor attention because its performance had been nothing special in recent years" but that "he was now impressed by the company's investment and development property portfolio in Hong Kong and by its strong financial position".</li> <li>Emperor Entertainment Hotel is listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and was renamed from "Emperor (China Concept) Investments" in 2004. In 2004, it had a market value of $426 million. In 1994, it developed a HK$1.1 billion Shanghai commercial complex, Emperor Star City, in which it held a 90% stake with the rest held by a group of artists including Jackie Chan, Anita Mui, and Alan Tam.</li> </ol>

Sources '''1. Emperor Entertainment Group''' <ol> <li> The article notes: "英皇娱乐集团于1999年正式成立，主要业务包括本地及海外唱片制作及发行、音乐出版、艺人管理及演唱会制作. 除音乐之外，还从事舞台剧、电影和电视制作，以及多媒体、商品特许经营和零售等业务. 自成立后，英皇娱乐即成为孕育当红艺人的摇篮. 当今艺坛红人如谢霆锋、容祖儿、古巨基、Twins、林峯、黄秋生、陈伟霆、泳儿、洪卓立、罗力威、钟舒漫、洪卓立、关智斌、张致恒、冯允谦、郑希怡等，皆为英皇娱乐旗下艺人. 历年来，旗下歌手于各地颁奬礼上勇夺过千奬项，英皇娱乐更曾三度夺得雷霆乐坛班霸大奖，创下辉煌战绩，今天的英皇娱乐，已是亚太区内其中一个最成功的音乐品牌. ... 自1999年成立之际，英皇娱乐已走过十五年的光景. 一直都是以标杆形象树立于整个娱乐圈的英皇娱乐，能够屹立15年依旧如此辉煌，相信这不是偶然，而是其背后每一步的脚踏实地，才会有今天的荣耀. 即将在2月1日“2015英皇集团年度盛典”暨“英皇娱乐·英皇电影15周年”盛大庆祝活动日前已成媒体热议的焦点，一场精彩的视听盛宴将拉开大幕！"</li> <li> The article notes (my bolding): "Trading in shares of Emperor Entertainment Group (EEG) was suspended yesterday after its biggest shareholder was detained by Hong Kong's corruption watchdog over alleged bribery for pushing artists' recordings up a billboard chart. EEG, one of the biggest record and entertainment companies in Hong Kong, and which boasts the popular martial arts actor Jacky Chan as a non-executive director, said trading had ceased pending an announcement. Albert Yeung, a substantial shareholder of EEG and chairman of the umbrella Emperor Group, was among 22 people arrested on Wednesday by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC). It is alleged they colluded to give certain singers preferential treatment. ... Jacky Chan has been a non-executive director of EEG since 2000. He is not one of the directors being investigated. It was alleged that those arrested from EEG and Universal Music might have offered advantages to senior executives at TVB to ensure that certain singers could secure musical awards and their hits would be given favourable positions on the billboard."</li> <li> The article notes: "EEG, a division of Hong Kong-based Emperor Group, manages some of Chinese pop's biggest acts like Joey Yung and the female pop duo Twins."</li> <li> The article notes (my bolding): "Those arrested include the president of Universal Music's Hong Kong branch; the owner of the Emperor Entertainment Group (EEC), the city's premier entertainment conglomerate; and three top producers from Hong Kong's largest TV station, Television Broadcasts (TVB). ... Universal Music Hong Kong president Alex Chan Siu-po, EEG chairman Albert Yeung Sau-sing and TVB program controllers Ho Lai-tsuen and Chan Ka-lun—who are in charge of the channel's weekly 'Solid Gold' music show—were reportedly among those arrested July 16 by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC). EEG CEO Ng Sui-wan was reportedly arrested July 18. ... Twenty-eight others—including top EEG artists Nicholas Tse Ting-fung, Yumiko Cheng and Eason Chan—were interviewed by the commission."</li> <li> The article notes: "The Emperor Entertainment Group is part of the Emperor Group, presided over by chairman Albert Yeung Sau-shing. The Group—which now has four public-listed companies—started its business as a watch-and-clock retail shop in 1942. Business has expanded to include everything from investment and real estate to restaurant franchises. The group branched out into entertainment when it bought Fitto Entertainment, a karaoke and music company. EEG was formed in January 1999, with involvement in four main areas of show business: music, films, concert production/promotion and artist management. Although EEG is part of the group, it is not one of the listed companies and is funded by Yeung and private investors. At the moment, EEG's local roster compromises Nicholas Tse, Lillian Ho, Joey Yung, Grace Yip, David Tao and Wang Chieh."</li> <li> The article notes: "In contrast to artists at other labels, the majority of EEG acts—including Twins—are managed by a sister company under the Emperor Entertainment Group."</li> <li> The article notes: "Frankie Lee, CEO/director of Emperor Entertainment Group (EEG), will leave his position at the end of June, after building the label into Hong Kong's biggest stable of local artists. ... Lee joined Emperor in January 1999 and took over its existing Fitto Records label, reinventing it as EEG with artists [Nicholas] Tse, Bondi Chiu, and Grace Yip. Last October, he launched a spinoff label, Music Plus, with Eason Chan and Roman Tam as artists. At last count, EEG had 18 artists, making it the largest local label in Hong Kong. Last December, EEG became the first record label to be listed on the Growth Enterprise Market, a secondary exchange for start-up companies on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. At that time, Lee was allocated stock options of 4.62 million shares. By leaving before the options mature, Lee stands to lose about $4 million Hong Kong ($500,000)."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Entertainment Group has drastically altered its business plan and use of listing proceeds only seven months after listing on the Growth Enterprise Market. The music producer and distributor said yesterday it had revised the business plan stated in the prospectus to reflect the planned acquisition of movies and television programme producer EMG from a firm controlled by its chairman. Such drastic changes are uncommon among listed firms. Emperor plans to cut listing proceeds dedicated to music production and distribution to HK$12 million from HK$60 million, but it will increase those for general working capital to HK$39 million from HK$7 million."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Entertainment Group (EEG), in which Emperor International has a 34.7 per cent stake, saw turnover drop 19.67 per cent to $196.91 million, with the firm posting a loss of $32.54 million. Last year, it had profit of $10.68 million. The opening of the Grand Emperor Hotel, a casino hotel in Macau with gaming tables and slot machines, had an impact on earnings. EEG chief executive Ng Yu said the company hoped to gain 15 per cent to 20 per cent of total revenue from content delivered on new media such as mobile ringtones and music video downloads. The firm yesterday announced an agreement to provide music content to Hutchison's 3G subscribers, who can pay up to $9 to download popular songs from EEG. The agreement ends EEG's partnership with New World Mobile, whose contract expires in September. New World Mobile was acquired by CSL this year."</li> <li> The article notes: "Record company Emperor Entertainment Group slumped to a net loss of HK$27.39 million in the year to March 31. The company, which includes Canto-pop star Nicholas Tse Ting-fung among its roster of artists, posted a net profit of HK$8.68 million the previous year. Shares in the Growth Enterprise Market-listed company fell 6.25 per cent yesterday to close at 75 HK cents. Turnover rose to HK$154.71 million last year from HK$122.39 million but the company had an additional expense of HK$31.17 million to produce film and television programmes. Music production and distribution was its core business, with album sales contributing HK$66.65 million, or 43 per cent, of turnover, and licence income making up 10 per cent, or HK$15.98 million."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Entertainment Group is under siege from illegal downloads and piracy of its films. The film and television production division was the worst performing in the group, reporting a loss of $20 million for the year to March, compared with a loss of $2.9 million a year earlier. It helped to contribute to an overall 48 per cent drop in profit to $10.68 million, while revenue fell 35 per cent to $245.13 million. Despite the drop, the company declared a dividend of 2.8 cents per share, its first since listing in 2000. Earnings were 4.11 cents per share."</li> <li> The article notes: "Albert Yeung Sau-shing's Emperor Entertainment Group has dropped a HK$75 million deal to break into the mainland's growing but fractious market for legal gambling on overseas soccer and basketball games. EEG had planned to rename itself Dragonlott Entertainment Group after buying a stake in Dragonlott Group, a firm registered in Jersey in the Channel Islands that planned to invest in 51 state-owned Sports Lottery betting shops in Hubei province."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Entertainment Group (EEG) is set to be listed on the Growth Enterprise Market (GEM) this month, according to sources. The company, primarily engaged in music production and distribution, is to offer 100 million shares at HK$1 each, sources say. The listing plan is said to have been approved by the GEM listing committee on Tuesday. BNP Peregrine is to act as the sponsor for the flotation. ... EEG, a member of Albert Yeung Sau-shing's Emperor Group, has a 15 to 20 per cent share in the local record industry, based on sales and air play."</li> <li> The article notes: "A television report claimed that Yeung bore Tsang a deep grudge after Star East - an entertainment company in which the comedian had substantial shares - spurned an offer to collaborate with Yeung's Emperor Entertainment Group (EEG) on several projects. A self-made businessman, Yeung's colourful life and career have been lived out as much in the gossip columns as on the business pages. He heads the Emperor group of companies, a massive empire which owns more than 300 subsidiaries and associated companies, including hotels, magazines and restaurants, and deals in investment and property. The group rose to prominence in showbusiness circles in 1999 when it established the EEG, which groomed rising stars such as Yung and Nicholas Tse."</li> </ol> '''2. Emperor Motion Pictures''' <ol> <li> The article notes: "英皇电影是香港最具规模及影响力的娱乐媒体投资公司之一，主要业务包括电影制作、电影和影碟发行、广告制作等. ＵＡ院线是香港主要院线之一，１９８５年率先将美式综合影院引入香港，目前已在广东开设三家影院. 双方此前的合作主要为电影发行." From Google Translate: "Emperor Motion Pictures is one of the largest and most influential entertainment media investment companies in Hong Kong. Its main business includes film production, film and film distribution, and advertising production. UA cinema is one of the major cinemas in Hong Kong. In 1985, the first American cinema was introduced into Hong Kong. Three cinemas have been opened in Guangdong. The previous cooperation between the two sides mainly for the film distribution."</li> <li> The article notes: "Founded in 2000, Emperor Motion Pictures is involved in movie production and distribution. It started operating cinemas in 2014. The group has five cinemas in mainland cities such as Shanghai, Hefei, Zhuhai and Foshan."</li> <li> The article notes: "Movies are big business on the mainland, and to tap into the growing demand, Hong Kong film company Emperor Motion Pictures and UA Cinemas have announced a tie-up to invest in and operate cinemas there. The deal has raised some eyebrows, and Gao Jun, a veteran in the film industry who was formerly a deputy general manager of Beijing-based cinema management company New Film Association, said it remained to be seen if the Emperor-UA project - aimed at mid-market to high-end filmgoers - would be a success."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Motion Pictures used FilMart in its Hong Kong home town to launch a bumper production and distribution slate of 15 film titles – marking 2015 and the company’s 15th year. The lineup spans mainstream features to be co-produced with mainland Chinese partners, arthouse titles and more indie-style pictures aimed at narrower Hong Kong audiences. ... Other pictures in earlier stages of production include Hong Kong gangster film “The Mobfathers,” starring Chapman To, and “Drink Drank Drunk,” a courtroom comedy to be directed by Takkie Yeung. Further off is a trio of untitled projects with big-name directors: a martial arts comedy by Yuen Wo-ping (“Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon”); a thriller from Alan Mak and Felix Chong (“Infernal Affairs”); and another by Benny Chan (“The White Storm”)."</li> <li> The article notes: "Hong Kong’s Emperor Motion Pictures is to pursue the expansion of its theatrical cinema operations in China despite the dramatic recent slowdown in the mainland Chinese box office. The company will next year open Emperor Cinemas in megacities Chengdu and Chongqing, both housed within Shin Kong Mitsukoshi department stores. In a statement EMP said that “Emperor Cinemas is poised for rapid expansion across China in coming years.” EMP, which has well-established film production, investment and distribution operations, was a relative late-comer to exhibition. It opened its first wholly-owned mainland cinema in Hefei in 2015 and expects to open its flagship Chinese site next year at the Emperor Group Center in Beijing."</li> <li> The article notes: "UA and EMP already collaborate in film distribution in Hong Kong. EMP produced 2012 hit “The Viral Factor,” financed “The Great Magician,” and was the HK distributor of “Personal Tailor” and “Chinese Zodiac.”"</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Motion Pictures (EMP) has recently revealed that it will produce and distribute 15 film titles this year in commemoration of its 15th-year anniversary. During the Hong Kong FilMart, the filmmaker has launched a bumper featuring the titles that moviegoers and enthusiasts could anticipate. ... The line-up will include mainstream movie co-productions with partners from Chinese mainland and some arthouse titles. The roster of the movie titles will also cover indie films targeting a narrower Hong Kong audience. One of the films to be released is 'To the Fore,' which will be directed by EMP regular, Dante Lam. The awaited cycling sports drama will star Eddie Peng and Asian superstar Siwon Choi."</li> <li></li> <li> The article notes: "Hong Kong-based Emperor Group Pictures has unveiled a new slate of a dozen films, with budgets of $1 million-$10 million, geared toward penetrating the emerging Chinese market. ... The new slate at EMP, formerly best known for its in-house productions, combines a mixture of distribution, investment and equity deals and is toplined by the $10 million drama 'The Sun Also Rises,' directed by Jiang Wen and starring Joan Chen, Jaycee Chan and Anthony Wong."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Motion Pictures and UA Cinemas have announced a strategic alliance to construct and operate cinemas in the mainland China, with the first site in Foshan slated for an opening in early 2014. ... It will be Emperor Motion Pictures’ first attempt in branching out beyond its core businesses of film production -- known for hits such as Let the Bullets Fly -- and distribution, for which it has collaborated successfully with UA Cinemas for years, bringing big ticket titles like The Hunger Games to Hong Kong."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor's 2007 lineup includes Jiang Wen's 'The Sun Also Rises,' 'Twins Mission,' Susie Au's 'Ming Ming' and Kenneth Bi's 'The Drummer.' Emperor will be presenting 'The Sun Also Rises' for the first time in a major market at the upcoming Festival de Cannes. It also will unveil a number of upcoming projects, both from their own production team and other producers."</li> <li> The article notes: "我们常说的英皇电影，一般指的就是英皇娱乐集团有限公司，它属于英皇集团旗下的子公司之一，成立于 2000 年，主要从事事音乐制作及经销、电影制作及发行、艺人管理及表演项目制作业务. 此前，他们参与投资制作的影片包括《破风》、《盲探》、《私人定制》、《一九四二》等，参与发行过的影片有《饥饿游戏 3》、《边境杀手》、《爆裂鼓手》、《王的盛宴》等. 英皇比较擅用的核心资产还是他们旗下已有的明星和合作导演，像谢霆锋、容祖儿、林峰、Twins 组合、张家辉、陈伟霆等演员，关锦鹏、陈果等导演. 但内地观众已经有了更多不一样的审美和明星消费需求，一些相对老牌的明星或许能唤起一部分人的观影热情，但大部分年轻的观众喜闻乐见的恐怕已经不再是他们了. 既然英皇电影已经打算将内地作为将来的主战场了，那么也就应该多花点心思来研究下内地观众的口味变化."</li> </ol> '''3. Emperor Capital Group Limited''' <ol> <li> The article notes: "Companies probably love getting attention from analysts at Emperor Securities Ltd. in Hong Kong. Investors who followed their advice for the past year, not so much. The unit of Emperor Capital Group Ltd. issued buy recommendations on every one of the 173 companies it reported covering from April 2015 through May 16. Its target prices, which the company says forecast trading levels within weeks, predicted gains of 25 percent on average. They are frequently the most bullish among analysts who cover the same stocks and list their calls with Bloomberg, including those based on the standard 12-month horizon. The picks ended up being so wrong during the past year’s rout of Chinese and Hong Kong stocks that shorting every one would have resulted in gains of about 6 percent after just four weeks and almost 13 percent if all were held through last week. ... Emperor Capital Group, the parent company, provides financial services from 11 offices in Hong Kong and three in mainland China. Founded in 1993, it began trading on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 2007 and has gained more than 270 percent since then, compared to the Hang Seng Index’s 0.1 percent increase. In the past year, the stock has fallen 59 percent, more than twice the benchmark’s decline. Its market value is HK$3.9 billion ($503 million). The companies it recommended, all but one listed in Hong Kong, have a median market value of $7.7 billion."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Capital Group, a brokerage unit of Hong Kong-listed Emperor International, is launching an up to HK$120 million initial public offering despite an ongoing inquiry by the Securities and Futures Commission into its securities and futures units. The SFC has proposed a public reprimand and pecuniary penalty against Emperor Securities but it is yet to conclude the investigation into the cold-calling activities by the securities and futures units, according to the company's listing document. Emperor Capital, which engages in a wide range of financial services including brokerage services for securities and futures as well as margin financing, is offering a combined 318 million new shares at 38 HK cents each, its listing document says."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Capital Group looks forward to becoming a greater draw for mainland investors with its one-stop solutions, CEO Daisy Yeung tells Sophie He. Daisy Yeung hopes more investors from the mainland will become customers of Emperor Capital Group, which she heads. The company's chief executive officer is the daughter of Albert Yeung Sau-shing, Hong Kong entertainment mogul and Emperor Group chairman. She voiced her hopes in recalling how Emperor Capital Group was founded in 1993 and listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in April 2007. In 2003, the company began restructuring and expanding its business, branching out into wealth management, asset management, financing and corporate finance. The company has gone from being a traditional brokerage to a financial institution that can provide one-stop investment services to its customers, Yeung told China Daily."</li> <li> The article notes: "英皇證券（717）昨公佈全年業績，集團繼與中國華融（2799）簽訂配售協議後，再引入中國太平保險（966）成為策略性股東，令大股東持股量由43.54%減至39.58%，行政總裁楊玳詩於業績會上表示，攤薄大股東持股量並非重要因素，指出兩間國有金融機構均有良好的基礎及業務，料可為集團帶來新價值，加上引入新股東亦為集團帶來資金以拓展其他業務，暫未有賣盤計劃."</li> </ol> 4. Emperor Watch & Jewellery  <ol> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Watch & Jewellery, a unit of Hong Kong-listed Emperor Group, plans to raise about HK$500 million through an initial public offering next month despite poor market sentiment, sources say. ... Emperor Watch & Jewellery's first watch and clock retail shop was founded by Mr Yeung's father, Yeung Shing, and opened in Hong Kong under the name Shing On Kee during the 1940s. Later, they opened another watch retail shop named Observatory Watch & Jewellery in Nathan Road in 1964. The company has seven retail outlets and one boutique shop in Hong Kong, all of which are located in prime shopping areas including Causeway Bay, Tsim Sha Tsui, Central and Wan Chai. In 2006, the company expanded its retail business to Macau and established an outlet at Grand Emperor Hotel. The total area of the company's stores is 32,000 square feet, up from 17,500 sq ft in 2005. ... Emperor Watch & Jewellery is the non-exclusive authorised retailer for 29 international brands of luxury watches, including Rolex, Cartier and Piaget." The article also lists analysis from analysts: <ol><li>Lei Yu, research analyst, Cash Asset Management Pros: The Emperor brand is well recognised in the city Cons: The company's core markets are Hong Kong and Macau, where competition is keen and the chance for aggressive sales network expansion is slim</li><li>Yiu Chin, director of financial analysis, Altruist Financial Group Pros: Two of Emperor Group's spin-offs had good performance on their trading debuts, which can attract speculators Cons: Tourist numbers are expected to drop because of the global economic slowdown, which will affect the company's outlook</li><li>Francis Lun Sheung-nim, general manager, Fulbright Securities Pros: The offer size is small, which means it is easy to manipulate the stock price Cons: The market sentiment is so bad nobody is buying anything </li></ol></li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Watch and Jewellry, a unit of tycoon Albert Yeung Sau-shing's conglomerate Emperor Group, plans to raise up to HK$581 million in a Hong Kong initial public offering (IPO). The retail chain joins other companies rushing to launch their IPOs before the end of the first half. Emperor Watch's offer will comprise 1.35 billion shares priced between HK$0.30 and HK$0.43, or 30 percent of the total capital after the IPO. Sources say each board lot contains 10,000 shares. ... Emperor Watch was formed in 1942. In addition to luxury-watch sales, it designs and sells jewelry in nine locations in Hong Kong and Macao. From 2005 to 2007, the company's revenue increased from HK$645 million to HK$1.56 billion, its net profits rose from HK$26.1 million to HK$159 million, and its gross profit margin jumped from 14.4 percent to 22.4 percent. Over 80 percent of the company's revenue in 2007 came from watch sales, and 12 percent came from jewelry sales in Hong Kong."</li> <li> The article notes: "Spring might have come for Emperor Watch and Jewellery, as the Hong Kong-based luxury retailer reported a surprise turnaround in second-half profits following steep rental cuts and the return of mainland Chinese tourists to the territory. Majority controlled by the family of Hong Kong entertainment mogul Albert Yeung Sau-shing, Emperor is a retailer of European-made watches and jewelry with operations at home, in mainland China and Singapore. Emperor posted Thursday a modest net profit of 3.8 million Hong Kong dollars ($490,000) in the second half of last year, narrowing its full-year loss to HK$64.8 million from HK$120.1 million a year ago. ... In Hong Kong, most of the group's 22 stores are in tourist districts such as Causeway Bay and Tsim Sha Tsui. It will open two or three branches this year in areas close to the Chinese border, such as Tuen Mun and Sheung Shui, to take advantage of lower rents and growing traffic there." </ol> '''5. Emperor International Holdings''' <ol> <li> The article notes: "EMPEROR International Holdings, the locally listed property, securities and retailing company, has moved into corporate finance. Through its arm Emperor Financial Services, which has brokerage, futures and gold and silver dealings, the group set up Emperor Capital on May 1. Vanessa Fan Man-seung, managing director of the Emperor Group, said: 'Previously, all we had was a brokerage arm, servicing mainly local customers. The addition of this corporate finance arm means we can move from pure agency to advisory.' Emperor Capital is one of five companies within Emperor Financial Services, in turn one of the companies within Emperor International Holdings, which counts listed companies Emperor (China Concept) Investment and Hong Kong Daily News Holdings among its subsidiaries."</li> <li> The article notes: "ONE of Emperor International Holdings' biggest challenges is to convince investors that it has shed its image as a deal-maker more intent on making money than building a solid financial base. The management concedes this is a problem that has overshadowed its strategic moves to become a property development and investment company with an attractive land bank. ... The appointment of former Australian Prime Minister Bob Hawke as a non-executive director last month was a savvy move to boost Emperor's profile and its already tight connections with China. Simon Yeung, an analyst with Daiwa Institute of Research, said Emperor had not commanded investor attention because its performance had been nothing special in recent years. Previously sceptical and biased by the speculation surrounding Emperor in the marketplace, Mr Yeung said he was now impressed by the company's investment and development property portfolio in Hong Kong and by its strong financial position."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor International Holdings will have the dubious honour as developer of the tiniest apartment in Hong Kong, with its plan to launch a project where each unit measures 61.4 square feet (5.7 square meters), according to filings with the Building Department."</li> <li> The article notes (my bolding): "Emperor International Holdings has stepped up its investments in Macau with the purchase of a commercial-residential property for HK$430 million. ... The company also owns a number of shops in Macau. Emperor said its property portfolio, spread across Hong Kong, Macau and the mainland, had a total value of about HK$10 billion at the end of September."</li> <li> The article notes: "“999-year lease.” Realty developer Emperor International Holdings, owned by entertainment mogul Albert Yeung Sau-shing, has been putting up ads like this one for Upton (維港峰), an upmarket waterfront residential development in Sai Wan. ... Among other properties, Emperor also owns Wincome Centre at Des Voeux Road Central and a mixed-use tower on Russell Street in Causeway Bay, both of which also have 999-year tenures."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor International Holdings (0163) will launch in the third quarter this year a residential project in Tuen Mun which will provide 14 detached and semi- detached houses. It will also undertake an urban redevelopment project in Sham Shui Po which will provide over 130 flats. ... Emperor International currently runs two hotels and a serviced apartment in Hong Kong, as well as two hotels in Macau. ... Among its acquisitions were Ampersand Building on Oxford Street in London, retail shops at Fairview Height in Mid-Levels and commercial and car park premises at Sui Wo Court in Sha Tin. ... Emperor International said yesterday that net profit for the first quarter this year amounted to HK$3.48 billion although revenue dropped by 27 percent to HK$4.07 billion. The board has recommended a final dividend of 58 HK cents per share."</li> <li> The article notes: "英皇系兩公司昨日公佈全年業績，英皇國際（163）轉虧為盈，截至3月底賺34.83億元，末期息每股5.8仙. 公司指盈利主要來自新落成的北京英皇集團中心之物業重估收益，佔整體盈利86%. 公司總收入下跌27%至40.7億元，英皇國際董事總經理兼英皇娛樂酒店執行董事范敏嫦解釋，收入大減由於本年度未有推出新樓盤，而佔地106萬呎的北京英皇集團中心出租率已達八成，未計入本年度租金收益."</li> </ol> '''6. Emperor Entertainment Hotel''' <ol> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Group, chaired by Albert Yeung Shau-shing, is raising its stake in listed Emperor International Holdings to 69.08 per cent through a share-swap deal worth $164.96 million. ... Last November, Emperor Entertainment Hotel, formerly known as Emperor (China Concept) Investments, agreed to acquire the Golden Princess, a 38-year-old vessel with a casino, from Mr Yeung for US$17 million by way of an issue of new shares. In return, Emperor Group received the 11.24 per cent stake in Emperor Entertainment Hotel."</li> <li> The article notes: "A plunge in high-stakes play appears to have turned the tables at Macau casino investor Albert Yeung Sau-shing's Emperor Entertainment Hotel. For the first time, gaming revenue from the mass-market tables at the Grand Emperor Hotel overtook revenue from its previously dominant VIP baccarat tables for the year to March. ... Emperor Entertainment recently restructured its revenue-sharing agreement with Stanley Ho Hung-sun's SJM Holdings, the licensed casino operator, to include a performance-based bonus on top of Emperor's traditional 40 per cent cut of gross gaming revenue."</li> <li> The article notes: "Meanwhile, Hong Kong-listed property developer Emperor (China Concept) Investments said it would change its name to Emperor Entertainment Hotel and convert its vacant commercial properties into a hotel/casino. The company was rewarded with a 176 per cent rise in its share price from $7.80 when its shares were suspended early this month, to $21.55 at yesterday's close."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Entertainment Hotel plans to soft-launch its 45 per cent owned Macau hotel-casino in September and expects to make its money back in three years with the help of actor Jackie Chan, who has a stake in the project. The upbeat prediction from the gaming flagship of Emperor International came as the company announced full-year results to March 31 that showed net profit had fallen 79.6 per cent from a year earlier to $17.59 million on turnover of $18.23 million. Earnings per share was 5 cents. The company declared no dividend. ... Emperor Entertainment Hotel also has a joint venture agreement with Shenzhen Lianhe Jinhoa Investment Development to develop Emperor Star City in the Yu Yuan district of Shanghai. ... The six-storey shopping arcade and entertainment complex with a gross floor area of 114,000 square metres broke ground last month and is due to open in 2007."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Entertainment Hotel, formerly known as Emperor (China Concept) Investments, expects its recently acquired vessel with a casino will contribute annual turnover of more than $108 million. Bryan Wong Chi-fai, an executive director at Emperor Entertainment, said the 38-year-old Golden Princess, which will be leased, would be the group's major source of income until its 45 per cent-owned Emperor Casino Hotel in Macau goes online. It is due for a soft launch in September. Yesterday, shareholders at an extraordinary general meeting approved the company's US$17 million acquisition of Golden Princess from Albert Yeung Shau-shing, the chairman of ultimate parent Emperor Group."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor Entertainment Hotel has identified a property in Vladivostok with the potential to become one of Russia's top hotel-casinos. ... In 1994, the company, then called Emperor (China Concept) Investments, signed a contract to develop the $1 billion Shanghai project, in which it had a 90 per cent stake, with the balance held by a group of artists including Jackie Chan, Anita Mui and Alan Tam. After an 11-year delay, the company now owns the land outright. It plans to revive the Star City project with its joint venture partner. ... Emperor Star City, due to be completed in 2007, comprises a hotel, 150 serviced apartments, a seven-storey shopping mall and 600 car parking spaces."</li> <li> The article notes: "EMPEROR (China Concept) Investments will launch its HK$1.1 billion Shanghai commercial complex, Emperor Star City, on the market by the end of 1996, provided construction work is on schedule. The 763,135 square foot project is the group's first major property development in Shanghai. ... Emperor Group is the holding company of two listed companies Emperor International and Emperor (China Concept)."</li> <li> The article notes: "A DECISION by the Stock Exchange of Hong Kong to reject the $1 billion takeover of Emperor (China Concept) Investments by a mainland-led consortium saw the stock tumble by 43 per cent yesterday. Emperor (China Concept) fell $2.15 to $2.85 on turnover of $15.6 million, making it the market's worst performer. The stock is now trading 66.6 per cent below the high of $8.55 reached just after the deal was completed on January 4. ... Emperor International and Emperor (China Concept) issued a joint announcement on Sunday that the sale of a 70.9 per cent stake to the consortium, which included Centre Regent Investments and Cheung Kong, had been withdrawn."</li> <li> The article notes: "Emperor's new close highlights mad concept stock boom It took Emperor (China Concept) Investments only two days to become the best-performing Hong Kong stock this year. Shares of the Albert Yeung Yau-shing-controlled firm almost doubled yesterday to $42, having soared 176 per cent on Friday after it agreed to buy a casino and hotel project from its chairman for $540 million. Yet even after this mighty rise from a year's low of $4.40 a share Emperor (China Concept) remains a small player with a market value of just $426 million. ... Last week's Macau deal came on the same day that Emperor (China Concept) launched a $22 million rights issue, underwritten by China Everbright Securities. That stock has quickly become worth $70 million, but has a way to run if research by the brokerage is taken seriously. Last week it tipped the stock to trade at a whooping $176, representing a 20 times increase in value."</li> <li> The article notes: "Property developer and investor Emperor International Holdings yesterday said profit fell 62 per cent to $43 million for the year to March after making provisions for loans advanced by its margin financing operations. The company's property development and investment arm in the mainland, Emperor (China Concept) Investments, said losses improved slightly to $92 million from $94 million a year earlier. ... Emperor (China Concept) is expected to complete the share sale of Hong Kong Daily News to holding-company Emperor International by November this year. During the year, Emperor International's turnover fell 24 per cent to $1.11 billion, Emperor (China Concept)'s with a slight decline to $485 million, and Hong Kong Daily News to $418 million, up 0.43 per cent."</li> </ol>

There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Emperor Entertainment Group, Emperor Motion Pictures, Emperor Capital Group Limited, Emperor Watch & Jewellery, Emperor International Holdings, and Emperor Entertainment Hotel to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 04:52, 6 August 2017 (UTC)</ul>


 * Delete all as blatantly promotional and excluded by WP:NOT. The question of whether or not they meet the general notability guideline does not matter in this case as it is not the sole factor as to whether or not we keep an article. Cunard's sourcing does not demonstrate that these are essential articles to the encyclopedia, and WP:N, the overarching guideline that the general notability guideline is of but one part, makes it abundantly clear that passage of the GNG alone is not enough for inclusion: the articles also must pass the policy of WP:NOT. In this case you have lovely descriptors such as Dedicated to nurturing young talents, EEG is the cradle of many of the hottest artistes in the Hong Kong music industry. Artistes under EEG management are frequent award winners of the territories' various annual music award ceremonies. throughout the text of all the articles.In deciding what to do in blatant cases of failing NOT, WP:WHATISTOBEDONE lists deletion as an option among others: my test for this is whether or not the Wikipedia article would likely be the most significant coverage a subject would have received, in which case promotional language with promotional intent would be a clear violation of our most fundamental principle Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertising platform. Having reviewed all of Cunard's sourcing, it fails this test for me, and the correct way to deal with this based on the principles of Wikipedia is deletion. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:43, 7 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The promotional wording was added to Emperor Entertainment Group by the new user in 2011. The article has existed since 2004, and in between 2004 and 2011 there are many neutral versions that can be reverted to. I have removed the promotional addition. The article has negative coverage of the subject, so it does not fail WP:NOT: "In 2003, Albert Yeung was again under investigation by the ICAC, along with Hong Kong singer Juno Mak, for allegedly bribing TVB for the Jade solid gold awards. As many as 30 people were arrested in connection with corrupt allegations with preferential treatment of singers and controlling the music billboards." I do not see promotion in the other articles, but I would be grateful if you would point any out so I can fix them. Cunard (talk) 04:33, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for removing that wording. Valoem below also removed some, which is also appreciated. On the point of negative coverage: negative coverage alone does not prevent an article from being promotional. Its relatively common to see minor criticisms included in spam pieces so as to avoid G11 deletion by those who know who the process works, so the mere inclusion of this does not exempt an article from compliance with NOT. The ultimate question I ask in all these cases is whether or not simply having a Wikipedia article would be more prominent coverage than the subject has ever seen before, and if the article clearly exists with the intent of promotion. That is the case in all of these articles. It is therefore excluded both on notability grounds and on NOT grounds. The sourcing you provided does not comply with our standards for corporations under WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:SPIP. Deletion is the optimal outcome based on both the notability guideline and our exclusion policy as found in NOT. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete all -- product of a sock farm (some CU confirmed). If this is indeed a notable company (of which I'm not convinced), then a volunteer editor would turn up to create it. There's no hurry to get to such a state, however. Wikipedia is not harmed by not having an article on a subject, so this is best deleted. K.e.coffman (talk) 05:35, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Userfy and Allow recreation if the promotional materials have been removed then Keep, currently there are promotional undertones, however Cunard has proved the subject pass GNG, there should be no reason to not allow a clean up and recreation. Valoem   talk   contrib  15:33, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I removed some additional promotional tones. Valoem   talk   contrib  15:38, 9 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment - the wording of the article does not determine notability and suitability for inclusion. It is the available sources that determine whether or not an article is kept. As has been shown, the available sources are seriously lacking and demonstrate subjectivism and promotionalism - the exact opposite of significant third party coverage in multiple reliable sources. Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion and it is not an extension of a company's website. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 20:44, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Wording can be a factor, but so can clear promotional intent. As I said above, the Wikipedia articles on these companies would be the most significant coverage they ever received. That sounds like both promotion and lack of notability to me. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * You make some good points. I didn't think about the fact that promotional wording in an article equals promotional intent. Thanks. And, oh yeah, the Wikipedia articles are the most significant coverage these companies have ever received - I am chuckling at that one - because it is true. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 03:15, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: For further discussion on the notability of the subjects and the sources provided and the fact that the promotional content was only added later to some of the articles.
 * Keep all. They might need to be purged of promotional material, but this company is definitely notable.Hyungjoo98 (talk) 14:25, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  So Why  18:52, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Comment It had significant coverage in Chinese but not in English, if possible (if they all were subsidiaries), merge to Emperor Group is a solution. Matthew_hk  t  c  11:49, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * BTW, COI material is another thing. Some of the company such as Emperor Entertainment Group and Emperor Motion Pictures were notable and pass GNG as major music and movie label of Hong Kong. Matthew_hk   t  c  12:06, 13 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Strong keep for film studio & music label, merge others into Emperor Group. This discussion needs to be divided into two parts: the media firms and the rest.
 * EEG & EMP are a major Hong Kong film studio & music label and should definitely be kept. Not only has shown comprehensively that they pass WP:GNG, but they have been a significant force in Hong Kong culture in the the last 30 years. The sourcing in our article is terribly weak now, but they are discussed in many SCMP articles; the difficulty is that "Emperor" is a word that comes up rather a lot in Chinese newspapers. In particular, there are many entries in the famous Lai See gossip column that assume Hong Kongers already know these firms. In addition, EEG is the only local label discussed in Ho's working paper on HK popular music, subsequently published in the journal Popular Music. I've also no doubt that there would have been far, far more articles in Hong Kong's thriving Cantonese press (which is national press coverage for this purpose). I tried looking for a Cantonese article covering the group as a whole but it was like looking for a needle in a haystack because of the vast amount of (non-significant) mentions in countless articles about various singers, films, and hotel projects. While Chinese Wikipedia does not carry any authority under our policies, I think it's interesting to note that EEG has its own template there and is the first in the domestic list of the record labels template.
 * The idea that WP would be the most significant coverage those two firms have achieved is very far off the mark. has cited WP:NOT in good faith, but needs to explain what part he is referring to, because for these two subsidiaries, the only relevant part I can see is WP:NOTPAPER. ;-) The mentions of WP:PROMO must be referring to some earlier revision; the one I see now is fine and the EEG article discusses an ICAC investigation, which is about as far from self-promotion as you can possibly get!
 * AFAIK the other (non-media) subsidiaries don't have anything like this cultural impact and the articles about them can safely be folded into the main Emperor Group article with redirects. Matt's talk 08:59, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Originally the citation was of NOTSPAM alone because Cunard's wall of text that does not satisfy the GNG is so hard to argue against because it's overwhelming. My view now is that it still fails WP:N/PROMK, the sourcing Cunard provides is trivial or promotional:there's a lot of it, but a Wikipedia article would still be the most significant coverage these subjects have ever received: that's enough in my mind to fail the GNG and NOTSPAM since there was clear promotional intent. I'd also like to note for the next closer that there was a clear consensus to delete before the relist, and that the relisting comment here borders on a !vote. TonyBallioni (talk) 13:04, 14 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per the arguments made and work done by Cunard, and plus many news hits. I appreciate the comments made by TonyBallioni and others, but ultimately if paid editors create articles on notable topics, that regular editors then clean up, what's the problem? Does anyone rag on Linus Torvalds for getting paid a comfortable living for writing a free operating system? Of course not. <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  13:05, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * its a credibility problem for the encyclopedia that also deals with our ethical obligations given the role of the English Wikipedia in the current world. The case here is that we have a company that had very minor coverage or promotional coverage in the press, as Cunard's sourcing demonstrates. By having this article we are giving the subject more coverage than it has ever had before: that's both the definition of being non-notable and the definition of promotion in my mind. In cases where the notability is in question, promotion should be a very important consideration in deletion: no one is talking about deleting The Coca-Cola Company here, but a group that has had some success but likely not enough to warrant an article.On the ethical front, part of the reasons that our resolve to not be an advertising platform is so important is because by giving companies that are not notable coverage, we actually increase their odds of success unfairly over their competition. This is the major problem with paid editing: it causes Citogenesis, and allows non-noteworthy companies to raise their profile unfairly over others. Allowing it is both clearly against Wikipedia policy (NOTSPAM), and in my a disservice to our readers, which is always the first thing we need to keep in mind. TonyBallioni (talk) 15:55, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The magazines of deleted New Media Group Holdings Limited was somewhat a household name in Hong Kong (which write Chinese, so you 99% can't build an article with English only source), it just not quite notable to knew they were sold and have the new owner "New Media Group Holdings". Mixing COI deletion and GNG deletion look awful BTW. Promotional material should be cleaned, COI should not be allowed, but if people keen on building pass GNG article but low importance, instead of creating high-importance one first, not sure it will "promote" the company or not even the editor was not a paid editor. Matthew_hk   t  c  17:33, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment If COI was involved. The best way was delete and restart a new one. Matthew_hk   t  c  15:33, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Sources referred to by Cunard are invariably relying on material originating with the company or company sources. I do not have the time nor inclination to check all 50 sources produced by Cunard since every other time Cunard produces these lists, 99% of the time the references fail the criteria for establishing notability including WP:CORPDEPTH and WP:ORGIND. If Cunard can't be bothered checking the sources then I don't see why the onus should be on the rest of us to identify the needle in the haystack. From the sources in the articles, they are press releases, company announcements, routine business announcements and information that can also be found on their own web pages. Fails WP:CORPDEPTH and/or WP:ORGIND. I also agree that the article fails WP:SPIP and WP:NOT. -- HighKing ++ 12:00, 17 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge and redirect all to Emperor Group; do not delete. Emperor Group is a well-known conglomerate in Hong Kong and Cunard has already shown the notability of the companies beyond doubt. The main Emperor Group article currently has limited detail about each sub-business and the articles about the subsidiaries are limited in length, so merging all of them to create a comprehensive article about the whole group is a reasonable solution. Deletion would get rid of promotional material but would also leave us devoid of any coverage of these articles, which isn't a good way out. Deryck C. 14:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)
 * There is little to none usable material that is not already present in the main article. Merge does not seem appropriate. Rentier (talk) 11:05, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Break
<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: If I were to close this today, it would be defensible to close it as delete. But, I think it would be valuable to hear from, all of whom commented early in the discussion, whether the sources, presented after they commented, change their opinion or not.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 21:56, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * My opinion remains unchanged since it's been motivated by the violation of the policy WP:NOT, which eloquently explained above. Whether or not some of the articles pass the notability guideline is a secondary concern but the very fact that we are discussing it suggests that the notability is borderline at best. Rentier (talk) 00:03, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes,, thank you for the ping, and I think you hit home on a very good point: we are not dealing with a company that is unambigiously notable. There's a reason this company is at AfD but The Coca-Cola Company isn't. Its at best regionally significant to Hong Kong, but we haven't had an unambiguous demonstration that the sourcing dictates that these companies are significant enough in the way that they are viewed by non-connected sources to warrant inclusion in a general purpose encyclopedia. When notability is ambiguous the concerns raised by NOT tip the balance in favour of deletion. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:33, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete all per Tony's well reasoned arguments above, the above sources are marginal at best and enforcing our terms of use are what tips this over to delete in my view. jcc (tea and biscuits) 11:40, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete All of them fail CORPDEPTH, GNG, SPAM. Barely any refs in there, what is in there is self-promotional. South Nashua (talk) 02:50, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Please explain how this negative article about Emperor Capital Group Limited from Bloomberg Businessweek titled "Every Stock Was a Buy to This Analyst Team, Then Shares Tanked" fails WP:CORPDEPTH. Cunard (talk) 04:00, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * That's just one source. Most of the articles up for deletion had around one or two, if that. At least a couple are needed to satisfy CORPDEPTH. South Nashua (talk) 14:38, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree with your conclusion that one source is insufficient to establish notability. I provided more sources above and would be grateful to hear your thoughts about those sources. Cunard (talk) 03:47, 26 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Regarding "If Cunard can't be bothered checking the sources then I don't see why the onus should be on the rest of us to identify the needle in the haystack." – I spent many hours finding and analyzing these 50 sources. I believe every source I posted contributes to establishing notability. It is clear you disagree. To reflexively dismiss all the sources because it is I who posted them is disheartening. Emperor Entertainment Group was called "one of the biggest record and entertainment companies in Hong Kong" by Financial Times. Billboard called it "the city's premier entertainment conglomerate" and "Hong Kong's biggest stable of local artists". Emperor Motion Pictures was called "one of the largest and most influential entertainment media investment companies in Hong Kong" by Xinhua News Agency. To say that "the Wikipedia articles on these companies would be the most significant coverage they ever received" is false. To say that "we haven't had an unambiguous demonstration that the sourcing dictates that these companies are significant enough in the way that they are viewed by non-connected sources to warrant inclusion in a general purpose encyclopedia" is false. It is clear that Financial Times, Billboard, and Xinhua News Agency consider these to be major companies. Cunard (talk) 04:00, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment about merging: merged material from these articles to Emperor Group here, here, and here, so it would be a violation of the Copyrights policy to delete the articles. There is plenty of encyclopedic content in the articles that could be used to expand Emperor Group as  suggested. Cunard (talk) 04:00, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Copyright is irrelevant. Matthew_hk   t  c  04:49, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Copyright is relevant. The authors of the merged material must be attributed. See Copyrights and Copying within Wikipedia, which says, "If material is used without attribution, it violates the licensing terms under which it has been provided, which in turn violates the Reusers' rights and obligations clause of Wikipedia's copyrights policy." Attribution for these three edits is not possible with the article histories deleted. Cunard (talk) 05:19, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * As a purely procedural note, keeping the edit history for the source material is just one way to meet the attribution requirement (albeit, the easiest and most common). As described in WP:MAD, other acceptable ways are citations in the edit summaries, or on the destination article's talk page.  00:16, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keeping the edit history is the easiest and most common way to meet the attribution requirement. The only sensible reason to delete the history and do the other methods is if the edit history contains BLP violations or copyright violations so cannot be preserved. Cunard (talk) 00:31, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * As a reply to the procedural note only here: I believe that I should have fixed the attribution problem: because so little of the articles were actually copied, it was very easy to identify the copyright holder behind the specific sentence or clause that was copied. I've done edit summary attributions (seen immediately below). Since the authors of any part of an article own their contributions in whole and are licensing them to us under CC-BY-SA 3.0, this should be enough to satisfy our licensing criteria since the parts copied went unchanged after they were initially inserted into the articles, there are actually only one or two copyright holders to the material copied. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:10, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * , thank you for pointing this out: I've fixed the attributions in the edit history per WP:RUD with the following three edits:  . If there are any other potential CC-BY-SA issues before deletion of these articles, please let me know so I can make the necessary attribution in history for copyright purposes. Luckily with Wikiblame it is very easy to identify the original author of every word so attribution shouldn't pose a problem. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:08, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * That Northamerica1000 merged some of the material in the articles to Emperor Group demonstrates that there is information in the articles worth preserving and merging to Emperor Group. It would not help the encyclopedia to delete this content. Cunard (talk) 03:47, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * NA1000 added short 2.5 sentences that barely meet the standards for unique creative expression, and that anyone could have easily created on their own. The neccesary attribution has been provided for copyright purposes. As described above, keeping these articles does hurt the encyclopedia. I don't think we'll ever agree on that, but I did want to clarify how little content was copied for the closer or any other editors. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:03, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * There is more material from the six articles that can be merged to Emperor Group. Deletion would prevent that from happening so deletion would not help the encyclopedia. For example, this content in Emperor Entertainment Group: "EEG was founded by Albert Yeung, a businessman in Hong Kong. The music label was originally called Fitto Record, until 1999. During the Fitto era, artist signed under the label includes Julian Cheung, Bondy Chiu, and the late Roman Tam. The label is affected by 1997 Asian financial crisis, which has caused the label, to be acquired by EEG in 1999. During the EEG's acquisition of Fitto, Nicholas Tse has become one of the artist rosters." is neutrally written and can be merged to Emperor Group. Cunard (talk) 00:31, 28 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment Regarding Emperor Motion Pictures, the primary source (their website) listed a lot of Hong Kong movie, not sure it is possible to rebuild it by a list of film, with citation of secondary source (i am quite sure it has many Chinese language source but not much in English). But the current state of the article is quite poor. The HKTDC was merely a directory and those content may be written by the company itself.  Matthew_hk   t  c  04:49, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Per Editing policy, it is fine for articles to be works in progress. The article has plenty of reusable content that can be copyedited and sourced to the sources I found. Cunard (talk) 05:19, 23 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: per reply above, I have fixed the attribution issues that might have posed a problem for deletion. If there are any more that are needed, I can fix them. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:07, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: I still say delete, if for no other reason than the COI, obviusly paid promo exploiting the free volunteer work of the people who genuinely create ad maintain the encyclopedia. 's coments are nevertheless also extremely  convincing. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 23:26, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment I have to say my sentiments have not changed. I have not found anything in sources that show these articles are not efforts to simply promote these entities. And, again, Wikipedia is the best coverage they have received. Pretty good promotional campaign that saves zillions of dollars. Fails CORPDEPTH, GNG, ORG, and so on. Routine coverage is trivial coverage. Aso, has presented some fine arguments for not keeping these articles. Thanks Toni ---Steve Quinn (talk) 07:43, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 *  merge all to the parent organization, Emperor Multimedia Group . The individual subsidiaries are not sufficiently important ot be worth separate coverage. According to WP:GNG, merely meeting the GNG is not sufficient in this sort of information-a single article is the way to handle it.  The argument that English sources are not available, but only Chinese, is irrelevant. The question of whether the entire complex should be removed for promotional is a reasonable question .Normally I would agree with Kudpung, except that I think one simple article is probably the most helpful to the readers. There is no one automatic solution.  DGG ( talk ) 08:22, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The parent organization for the six companies is Emperor Group, not Emperor Multimedia Group. The main article already contains (in my opinion sufficient) information about each of the subsidiaries. Rentier (talk) 09:17, 28 August 2017 (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.