Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/He Ting Ru


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn due to being elected into the 14th Parliament of Singapore. (non-admin closure) – robertsky (talk) 20:09, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

He Ting Ru

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Other than running for the Singapore Parliament for two occasions, there are no other notable achievements of note in the content, being a lawyer isn't notable; being a secretary of a sub group in a party isn't notable. I don't see other activities on the page that are notable. Thus may not pass WP:GNG, WP:NPOL. A redirection to 2020 Singapore general election should be done given that the person in question is running for it per WP:POLOUTCOMES, however, the editor who started this page had reverted the redirection. The editor had yet to answer satisfactory in the Talk page as to why this article should remain. – robertsky (talk) 06:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 06:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 06:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete Per nominator. Per Articles for deletion/Shawn Huang Wei Zhong, I redirected the page to 2020 Singapore general election. Talkpage discussion fails to establish BLP notability. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 06:49, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. For the reasons below:
 * She's leading a team (1, 2) to contest in a GRC which has been described by the media and analysts as one of the hottest battlegrounds (3), one of the most watched seats(4) etc., indicating the strong media attention on the candidates contesting there.
 * A google search on her English and Chinese name churns up a handful of standalone articles on her by mainstream media in Singapore including one-to-one interviews, justifying her notability
 * Member of the 2nd best-performing GRC team put forth by an opposition party at the 2015 elections.
 * As I've mentioned in the article's talkpage, the media acknowledged her online buzz and even compared her to Nicole Seah, a popular politician who once was the 2nd most followed Singaporean politician on social media, and who has a mid-importance, b-class rated article here on Wikipedia.
 * Exco member and secretary of the party's youth wing and the appointment of positions in this exco have been given due importance and reported by the media (5, 6)


 * I suppose the reasons, explanations and citations given above should suffice and establish her notability. I might include these content in the article when the Afd tag is taken off but I had actually meant to create a stub and putting all the details above into proper sentences and expanding the article is rather time-consuming. Will see how this goes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cenderpede (talk • contribs) 13:05, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


 * On your points:
 * Leading a team doesn't say anything much. There are 17 GRCs, 35 team leaders. There are other hotly contested areas as well. But what has she said or done to differentiate herself from the rest?
 * The standalone articles are mostly a consequence of the current election. Almost every, if not all, candidates have various degrees of press coverage.
 * Again, what had she done then to make herself stand out from the 2015 team?
 * On Nicole Seah, notability is not inheritable. Nicole Seah is Nicole Seah, He Ting Ru is He Ting Ru. Can He Ting Ru be notable without the comparison? See WP:NOTINHERITED. Also for Nicole Seah, press coverage on her was sustained in between elections, be it good or bad. What about Ting Ru? Was there coverage between 2015 and 2020 that stuck?
 * On the Youth Wing, the notability of the organisation in its own Wikipedia article is in question. That aside, personally I have yet to see the impact of WP's Youth Wing in the society, unlike YPAP, which by grace of its parent organisation mostly, is more visible. Again, what had she done to impact the society through her appointment? Nothing is detailed there. Having an appointment of a subsidiary group, with questionable notability here, may not be as notable as you think.
 * Look, if you think Ting Ru is notable, you may want to establish the notability behind the impact of her actions through her appointments. i.e. "During her appointment as a Youth Wing secretary, she was instrumental in laying out XYZ policies was later adopted at a a higher level/beyond the party". (Of course, such assertions need to be backed by verifiable sources.) As it stands now, the article or your reasonings here have nothing to dissuade me from withdrawing this AfD. – robertsky (talk) 05:05, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


 * There are in fact only three to four hotly contested areas this time round and it is clear that her being highlighted by the media by leading a team there establishes her notability per say
 * Not really, they are only a handful of candidates who have had one-to-one interviews with the media and we know we can count the number of mainstream media outlets in Singapore with just both hands. Interviews indicate significant press coverage.
 * You might want to read again what I have written earlier.
 * Nicole Seah had roughly a 9-year hiatus in betweeen, has not yet been elected and not exactly notable in her work field either and yet she has an article here. Same goes to Jamus Lim, not exactly a well-known figure in his work field and also a fresh face contesting for the first time. So talk about double standards much?
 * It's reported by the media which means they recognize the functions and importance of the division.
 * As I've stated, it's too time-consuming to include that many details and this article is meant to be a STUB. On the other hand, it's quite noticeable that there a number of civil servants and close associates of a certain party in Singapore who are contributing here on Wikipedia on a long-standing basis and are sometimes contributing content which are much privy to the man in the street, such as this candidate who was brought by Justanothersgwikieditor. So maybe you would like to disclose your affilations and occupation to ensure that your views are not skewed? -- Cenderpede (talk) 15:30, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * As I've stated, it's too time-consuming to include that many details and this article is meant to be a STUB. On the other hand, it's quite noticeable that there a number of civil servants and close associates of a certain party in Singapore who are contributing here on Wikipedia on a long-standing basis and are sometimes contributing content which are much privy to the man in the street, such as this candidate who was brought by Justanothersgwikieditor. So maybe you would like to disclose your affilations and occupation to ensure that your views are not skewed? -- Cenderpede (talk) 15:30, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


 * 1. Nicole Seah's article had an AfD and survived. That's the difference. As for Jamus Lim, feel free to open an AfD if you feel so. Personally, I have not done so because I have yet to participate in an AfD which involves WP:PROF guidelines, which I suspect other editors may use it in addition to WP:NPOL, to argue for and against deletion.
 * As it stands, the not-so-stubby stub here has yet to establish the notability. I can empathise with you on the time consuming portion as I am working on updating other BLPs at the moment, but that's not a reason not to expand the article to establish the notability (I have hinted at withdrawing the AfD, but you got to give me something solid in the article). I have already out myself by virtue of having my social network accounts on my user page. (Note, other editors may take it less kindly on the request to out oneself.) I have neither the party affiliations nor employed in positions that would skew my views. My conflict(s) of interest here on Wikipedia is also declared on my user page, which would also not skew my views. I am no privy to any intrinsic details on any of the candidates or parties. If you had gone through my contribution history, I applied the same treatment on many of the other non-notable yet-to-be elected candidates (be it PAP, WP, PV, etc), to either redirect back to 2020 Singaporean general election or move to the draftspace. This AfD was opened after you had reverted an earlier redirection, and I presumed that you wouldn't have taken kindly to a move to the draftspace. As for, the page creator wasn't User:Justanothersgwikieditor, but User:Thang324 who had been warned for WP:COI. You can check the page history on this. In fact, I think User:Justanothersgwikieditor has been one of the other editors who have been redirecting other non-notable yet-to-be elected candidates as well. – robertsky (talk) 18:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Why is COI important in an AfD? The arguments for and against an AfD discussion are taken in its merit and if a COI editor gives a poor argument, it will be given lesser weight based on the argument and not on their COI. Anyway, I declare I do not have a COI (no affiliation with any political parties, be it paid, voluntary or what so ever and nor have I worked in any civil sector agencies). As per what robertsky said, see my redirects 1(WP), 2(WP), 3(NSP), 4(PAP) and talkpage discussion with a PAP affiliated COI editor about the editor's COI issue. Also, please declare any COI you might have. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:47, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Why is COI important in an AfD? The arguments for and against an AfD discussion are taken in its merit and if a COI editor gives a poor argument, it will be given lesser weight based on the argument and not on their COI. Anyway, I declare I do not have a COI (no affiliation with any political parties, be it paid, voluntary or what so ever and nor have I worked in any civil sector agencies). As per what robertsky said, see my redirects 1(WP), 2(WP), 3(NSP), 4(PAP) and talkpage discussion with a PAP affiliated COI editor about the editor's COI issue. Also, please declare any COI you might have. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 01:47, 9 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete unelected candidate, not a notable politician, not otherwise notable. The gender issues with the article are a bit disorientating, though this has nothing to do with the delete !vote. SportingFlyer  T · C  20:50, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment
 * I have added my replies next to your comments.
 * I find the gender nouns somewhat confusing as well as I was creating the article but it's a non-issue. I actually hope you had taken the time to read through my reasons stated above, rather than brushing it off with one-liners such as oh "she's not elected and therefore not notable", as it is rather discouraging to editors who took time and effort in creating and contributing relevant, neutral and balanced articles on Wikipedia. Heck, I've spent such an amount of time providing sources/citations and explanations on here when time could have been better spent on improving other articles...
 * Additional inputs from other editors who are balanced and neutral and also who have a fair knowledge of the subject in Singapore are much welcomed and appreciated. Cenderpede (talk) 15:30, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The person simply is not eligible for a Wikipedia article at this time. I'm not trying to discourage you. It's not great getting an article deleted, but we do have notability guidelines, and this person does not pass them. SportingFlyer  T · C  17:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to 2020 Singaporean general election for now, similar to Articles for deletion/Shawn Huang Wei Zhong. It is preferable to deletion. I think this might be a case of WP:BIO1E, where she's gaining notability because of GE2020 but there isn't enough significant coverage elsewhere to justify a standalone article. However, that might change quickly after the results are announced. -- AquaDTRS (talk) 21:17, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as MP elect per WP:POLOUTCOMES. -- AquaDTRS (talk) 19:55, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. She just won a seat in the election and would be an MP --Dps04 (talk) 19:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Snow keep in light of their win. She is now an MP-elect and will be sworn into office pretty soon. Nom should have held their horses before nomming Kingoflettuce (talk) 19:47, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep She is now elected as MP. TheGreatSG&#39;rean (talk) 19:55, 10 July 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.