Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hong Kong Returnee


 * 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The result of the debate was nomination withdrawn. Chick Bowen 17:03, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Hong Kong Returnee
Tagged for speedy deletion, but "Neologism" is not a CSD. No vote. Nomination withdrawn--the only problem here is with the title of the article; it should never have been tagged speedy in the first place. Chick Bowen 21:16, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I am the article's author. This is the first wiki entry I've created.  I see that it was originally tagged for speedy deletion because it is considered neologism.  Is there a wiki criteria for what is considered neologism?  I certainly was not the person that coined the term "Returnee" or "Hong Kong Returnee", but I concede it is a relatively new term.  Also, I only created the entry several hours ago.  I know it is short, but I plan on expanding it in the next few days during my free time.  Any advice on how I can take this entry out of AFD status would be much appreciated.  Hong Qi Gong 23:48, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The policy in question is Verifiability. An article has to be based on sources other Wikipedians can check.  So a term can't just be on the web or in everyday parlance, there has to be a citation to a valid media outlet (like a national or international newspaper) or a scholarly source.  Chick Bowen 23:55, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
 * The one external link that I've provided in the entry is an academic paper written by Nan M. Sussman, Ph.D. Dr. Sussman is a social psychologist and a cross-cultural specialist.  Is that considered a "scholarly source"?  If not, may I ask what would be a better example of a scholarly source?  At any rate, I will work on providing more and better sources.  Hong Qi Gong 02:29, 26 February 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.