Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gwak Jae-u


 * 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 speedy keep LactoseTI 15:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Gwak Jae-u
Not notable - there is very little available on this person; I think it should just be merged into the main articles. LactoseTI 03:33, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, Speedy keep, the fact that for now there is little information which was translated to English wikipedia for this person in particular, doesn't meant that the article has to be deleted. In the Korean version of Wikipedia ko:곽재우 there is plenty information about him. And there are many writtings and even a picture of a statue of him available at http://www.koreandb.net/General/person/p161_00587.htm , articles start with little information-this is true and it doesn't mean because they have only few lines, they had to be "speedied". It is likely that it will be expanded sometime in future by a skilled korean translator. --HappyApple 03:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Bearing in mind that Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, what makes you believe this article is likely to be expanded? It has been there a year and is a one-sentence stub. Fan-1967 04:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Does a unlikelihood of expansion have any bearing after notability and a source of reliable information has been established? Afterall, the length of an article has never been established as a reason for deletion, even if it has been used to cite the unlikelihood of finding reliable sources. If we need a catalyst, then a translation can be requested. As is, even as a sentence, it's a useful link to the Korean article. hateless 07:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The Wikipedia is not a crystall ball policy mainly relates to future events and extrapolations, and current or future people/things/groups for which only speculation about their futures exists. It doesn't really apply to famous Korean military leaders of the 16th century.  &#9786; Uncle G 12:00, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Even on the Korean wikipedia article, there is very little more than what is on this one (in terms of content)--I sincerely doubt this article is ever going to be much more than a (short) stub. Perhaps he could get his own section on the Hideyoshi's Invasions page.  If there really is such a plethora of information, it would be broken out later.  Incidently, no one is "speedying" anything... LactoseTI 04:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * keep. it is not "very little" in korean wikipedia. `'mikka (t) 05:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Happy Apple. hateless 07:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep as expandable, and affected by systemic bias vs. non-english topics. — Adrian~enwiki (talk) 09:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep after expansion from sub-stub to decent stub. Fan-1967 14:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep, suggest speedy keep. Generals who participate in important campaigns are notable per se, and even if that's the only thing they are remembered for.  - Smerdis of Tlön 14:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

"Speedy keep" it is; removing the notice now. I still think it'd be better served inside the main campaign itself, but HappyApple at least expanded it a bit. LactoseTI 15:27, 9 August 2006 (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.