Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Libby Liu


 * 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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Hey man im josh (talk) 19:09, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Libby Liu

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Reviewed during NPP. No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG. Of the 14 references, 12 are not about her, and two are bios on the websites of her own organizations. (Radio Free Asia and OTF) Tagged for notability since July 2023. Previously deleted. North8000 (talk) 17:58, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Law.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. It seems to be a COATRACK largely based on sources about Whitleblower Aid. Liu is evidently successful in her career but there's no evidence she meets WP:GNG. Sionk (talk) 18:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment - my initial look for sources finds the Washingtonian ranking her among Washington DC’s 500 Most Influential People of 2023, as well as sources that seem to add more context to her career, e.g.
 * V.O.A. Directors Resign After Bannon Ally Takes Charge of U.S. Media Agency (NYT, Jun. 15, 2020)
 * CEO of Open Technology Fund Resigns After Closed-Source Lobbying Effort (Vice, Jun. 17, 2020)
 * Lawsuit Argues Dismissal of Government-Funded Media Employees Was Unlawful (NYT, Jun. 23, 2020)
 * Judge Finds U.S. Agency for Global Media CEO Broke Law In Seizing Control Of Fund (NPR, Oct. 17, 2020)
 * 'I Was Speechless': Law Firm Investigated Its Own Ex-Client For Trump VOA Chief (NPR, Mar. 10, 2021)
 * The Facebook whistleblower’s case was a big gamble for the nonprofit supporting her (WaPo, Oct. 22, 2021)
 * earlier coverage includes China's stifling of Web detailed / U.S. firms often cooperate, experts reveal to Congress (SFGATE, 2006)
 * Beccaynr (talk) 18:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Just clarifying, per that link it is the Washingtonian's site/magazine's pick of the 500 most influential in the DC area. Regarding GNG, we're looking for something that has in-depth coverage of her.  Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 21:22, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Her inclusion on the Washingtonian list, along with the brief bio, seems to be secondary recognition that contributes to her WP:BASIC notability. I don't have time to fully research or to try to rewrite the article now, but it seems likely she has received more than trivial coverage by secondary sources over time to support her notability and to develop a neutral and balanced biography. Beccaynr (talk) 21:37, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The key thing here is just finding (or not finding) 1-2 GNG type sources. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 21:41, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * BTW my nomination (and subsequent discussion) is just trying to do my NPP job properly, to explain that I did and to help sort this out.North8000 (talk) 21:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Of course! and I am sorry I don't have time right now to do my test-notability-through-a-rewrite thing right now, which may be a way to help demonstrate WP:BASIC/WP:GNG, through a combination of multiple independent sources. Beccaynr (talk) 22:12, 30 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Radio, Internet, Asia,  and United States of America.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  19:09, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment - I've made some updates to the article to add sources listed in this discussion, remove sources without coverage of Liu, and add content, including from additional research. I still plan to check the Wikipedia Library. Beccaynr (talk) 05:39, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Could you point out any references that look like GNG coverage? Thanx. North8000 (talk) 01:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I am still reviewing research and working on the article, but I think the WP:BASIC SNG would be the most likely guideline to support her notability, with a combination of sources over time demonstrating that she/her work have received GNG-equivalent coverage in independent, reliable, secondary sources. Beccaynr (talk) 02:16, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * For example, for her work with Radio Free Asia related to what could be described as the Great Firewall, there is SFGate in 2006, which provides context for her description of RFA's work; NYT in 2011, similarly providing context for her description of RFA's work; her writing and RFA work focused on circumventing Chinese government censorship is also discussed in a 2009 Journal of Business Ethics article at pp. 497-498. The sustained coverage of this aspect of her career, when combined, seems to provide some support for her notability. The Open Technology Fund coverage related to her has more focus on her as part of a group of people fired by Michael Pack and the lawsuits that followed, but there is some coverage from the WSJ in 2016, which includes a description of her role in the development of the OTF. I have not yet done a specific search at the Wikipedia Library for her work at Whistleblower Aid, but the sources in the article now include a 2021 WaPo interview with context, and The Guardian quoting her in 2022. Beccaynr (talk) 03:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * There is also the Washingtonian in 2023, placing her in a group of 20 people it describes as "Whether fighting for democracy or federal-employee benefits, these people care deeply about having our public system work effectively", and the 2020/2021 Luxembourg Peace Prize award (this appears to be a reprinted press release); from my view, the Washingtonian recognition in particular seems to be independent, reliable, and secondary coverage of her and her work, and even though it is not in-depth, it contributes support for her WP:BASIC notability. Beccaynr (talk) 03:45, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Being considered as one of 500 most influential people by the Washingtonian is a very tenuous claim to notability indeed. Being a laureate of the Luxembourg Peace Prize sounds slightly more impressive, though this doesn't appear to be a major award. Coverage of the work of Radio Free Asia would count towards the notability of RFA, but not Liu. Sionk (talk) 12:27, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I've also been thinking about her notability as a creative professional, based on the sources, e.g. WP:DIRECTOR - in this 2011 NYT piece, she discusses how the organization she directs collects information for journalism; the 2006 SFGate is her discussing how they teach people to access the journalism; in this 2011 NYT piece, "Liu said she spends most of her time trying to figure out how to get around Chinese government firewalls that make it difficult for young people to get Radio Free Asia’s broadcasts on the Internet or their cellphones." The 2009 Journal of Business Ethics source discusses her work and her writing. Her role creating the Open Technology Fund within RFA is discussed by The Wall Street Journal in more than trivial coverage, and the OTF and Liu receive more coverage in the wake of the Pack firings and subsequent lawsuits. The most limited coverage I have found so far is related to her current role at Whistleblower Aid, and the revisions to the article since your !vote reflect this; from my view, the RFA/OTF coverage seems to help show that she has held leadership positions at two journalism-related organizations, and her work within these organizations has received coverage in independent, reliable, and secondary sources. From my view, it seems established by souces that she had an active leadership role within RFA and OTF, so the coverage related to her and her work supports her notability. Beccaynr (talk) 13:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I nominated based on the "rules" and just trying to do my job properly. At the time the info in the article was just resume type stuff.  You seem to building more both in content and sources including the type of stuff described in your last post.   IMHO some more of that type of development (even without GNG sources) might make me personally want to "keep" even if that needs a little wp:iar. North8000 (talk) 14:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I completely respect the nomination, not only based on the article at the time it was nominated several months after its creation, but also in light of the deep-diving into research needed for development. I appreciate your bringing this article forward for review and discussion. Beccaynr (talk) 14:55, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Based on all of that including substantial additions my opinion has changed to Weak keep .  "Weak" because I think that there are still not GNG sources and so I'm relying on a bit of WP:IAR or else consideration of all of the other material and considerations under How Wikipedia notability works.  Sincerely, North8000</b> (talk) 14:18, 2 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep, based on WP:BASIC and a combination of sources over time; I recently added a source from NPR (April 2021) with a more substantial focus on Liu than some other sources related to the Pack firings, including her filing of a whistleblower complaint, although some sources have more than trivial coverage; with the 2009 Journal of Business Ethics coverage of her writing and work at RFA, as well as the 2016  Wall Street Journal coverage of her role developing the OTF, we seem to have independent, reliable, and secondary coverage of major aspects of her career over time. To the extent WP:IAR is needed to support a standalone article, I have been thinking on how fragmenting this content across several articles, at minimum to Radio Free Asia and the Open Technology Fund, does not seem to be the most efficient outcome, because Liu held a leadership role at RFA for 14 years, led both the creation of the OTF and the OTF after it became an independent grantee, and had an active role in what happened after Pack was appointed, and has had more than trivial coverage of these aspects of her career. As a side note, I appreciate the thoughtful discussion here, and consideration while I worked on the article. Beccaynr (talk) 15:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:BASIC with sources presented by Beccaynr. They're reliable and in-depth enough IMV. SBKSPP (talk) 01:23, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per the sources found by Beccaynr. Passes WP:GNG. 76.64.163.41 (talk) 16:12, 4 November 2023 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.