Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jun Hong Lu


 * 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 no consensus. A lot of editing has taken place, and someone mentioned potential POV issues, but there isn't a clear consensus to delete here. There does seem to be a consensus that the article is problematic, so I suggest anyone really interested in keeping it, go and actually fix and demonstrate notability, as it might not pass the next AFD. Dennis Brown - 2&cent; 23:47, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Jun Hong Lu

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Notability: while the page has been flooded with cites, they were self-published, paid or otherwise highly unreliable (word press pages, "Danish royal news" inexplicably located in Hong Kong). It remains an orphan and I have been able to find little *information* on Jun Hong Lu on the web that is *not* self-published. Even these pages don't give information about Jun, they just mention his name and that he's a superior spiritual master. Ogress smash! 21:55, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep . I dare say anyone here regards Jun Hong Lu of no notability is not a Buddhist otherwise you would have heard of him. He is extremely well known, not necessarily for the right reason, especially for Buddhists in Asia among the Chinese speaking population. I am surprised that Wikipedia does not have an article on him. I guess it is difficult to be impartial if you actually know him well enough to write about him. There is one official English website for his Dharma door which is guanyincitta.com. All the other websites that might look like his, are mostly created by his disciples in various countries in order to reach out to their local population which is a suitable thing to do. You need a bit of patience to find what you are looking for. Doctor1931 (talk) 3:33, 15 June 2015(UTC) — Doctor 1931 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * You, sir, are a blatant puppet. Ogress smash! 05:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep & revise. This person is a significant religious leader who was recently invited to the 2015 UN Vesak celebration sitting on the first row out of the attendance of 6000 people who are all Buddhist or religious leaders in one way or another. I managed to find a very bad imiage to support the claim on the vesak's offical website-- it is the 7th photo on this page http://www.undv.org/vesak2015/en/news_detail.php?id=125 and Lu is the person on the very right in the black suit. There are noticeable coverage on Lu by the convention medias such as television and newspapers, some of which are mentioned in the disputed article. Furthermore, if you find it difficult to search anything on Jun Hong Lu on the internet, please try to search "Guan Yin Citta" which is foundered by Jun Hong Lu. This article certainly has plenty of room for improvements but Jun Hong Lu deserves a place in the Wikipedia. I suggest revision rather than deletion.VThomson (talk) 23:29, 14 June 2015(UTC) — VThomson (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * "This person is a significant religious leader" who we can't even find a single source for that isn't his own website? Ogress smash! 03:16, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * then look harder .Doctor1931 (talk) 3:37, 15 June 2015(UTC) — Doctor1931 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * You, sir, are a blatant puppet. Ogress smash! 05:04, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * There's none so blind as those who will not see. unsigned comment left by 101.174.6.161 — 101.174.6.161 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Platitudes don't change that you are a puppet.Ogress smash! 09:46, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2015 June 12.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 22:21, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. Despite extensive efforts by the article's creator, we still don't have any trustworthy evidence of notability. Maproom (talk) 08:45, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as nominator. Ogress smash! 11:55, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability, fails WP:GNG. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:26, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * keep for the reasons noted above.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.174.6.161 (talk) 09:48, 15 June 2015 (UTC)  — 101.174.6.161 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Why is an IP voting on this article? Special:Contributions/101.174.6.161 demonstrates that not only is he voting, he's voting fraudently, as he is an IP sock of User:Doctor1931. Ogress smash! 12:03, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:15, 14 June 2015 (UTC)


 * very tenuous keep - this is a hard one. The Radio Australia link looks legit (Google translate here ) but a lot of the other references are very obscure publications, if not self published, and I've no idea if the conferences are reputable or not. A pre-revert version of the article claims 4 mentions in China's Peoples Daily but I don't know how to check them. He's appeared on the Turkish satellite TV channel a9 TV here  but I'm not sure how significant that is. A google of "guan yin citta", as suggested above, only gives a few forum discussions (for and against) and a lot of their self published material. On the weight of Radio Australia appearance I'd give him the benefit of the doubt. Adpete (talk) 07:10, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Also "Lu Jun Hong" seems to give more hits then "Jun Hong Lu". Probably the most important one is a warning against him from a number of Malaysian Buddhist organisations. Adpete (talk) 10:39, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep (TNT)/delete Adds possible Chinese, which does give more independent sources: . IMO the article has been very WP:POV in being fully supportive/promotional of Lu, with apparently no regard of the negative incidents that also exists, including as reported by Malaysia's Chinese language press.  野狼院ひさし  u/t/c 09:19, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:13, 20 June 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JAaron95  &#40; Talk &#41;  15:51, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - he is an important leader of Chinese Buddhists and this article mentions he won an international award Alec Station (talk) 12:21, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep for now -, you're not supposed to delete non-contentious, non-copyrighted material because it's from primary sources. Please don't do that. He's certainly considered a reliable source on when his own birthday is etc. And often this information is very, very useful to get keywords to find more info! For example this article - I don't know what The Arab Telegraph is but if he's actually getting awards from the UN and US Congress, that's important information we need to have to in order to consider deleting or keeping this article, and we need that to quickly be able to do the right searches to get info from RS. —Мандичка YO 😜 14:57, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete Looking at the full article in the history, there is nothing to indicate notability. The award is not notable either.  There is no indication the movement is notable; giving speeches is not by itself notability, unless there is extensive coverage rom reliable independent sources. All I see is notices and PR. DGG (at NYPL) -- reply  here 23:42, 8 July 2015 (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.