Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lindsay Wong


 * 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. RL0919 (talk) 11:43, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Lindsay Wong

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Based on a body of work that is only a single text that has been shortlisted for a single award, the page's subject does not meet notability guidelines as outlined for WP:AUTHOR TheAnayalator (talk) 05:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. CptViraj (📧) 05:24, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CptViraj (📧) 05:24, 6 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. Being shortlisted for a top-level national literary award is, and has always been taken to be, a straight pass of WP:AUTHOR. There is no official "minimum cutoff" number of books that a person has to have written before they can be considered a notable writer — one work can be enough, if it gets shortlisted for one of a country's most important and prestigious literary awards, which the Hilary Weston Prize most certainly is. And considering that the nominator has made less than 100 edits to Wikipedia in their entire history, of which only 37 happened in the entire 2010s, I strongly suspect that the nomination is motivated far less by any familiarity with Wikipedia's actual inclusion standards, and far more by some kind of personal issue with Lindsay Wong for reasons that are absolutely none of Wikipedia's concern. Bearcat (talk) 05:37, 6 January 2020 (UTC)


 * I have no 'personal' issues with the author and my relative Wikipedia inexperience should not factor into invalidating this discussion. I note that BearCat is correct about the number of works that can qualify for notability. However, the criteria are not clear cut as to what qualifies as an 'important figure' or a 'significant, well-known work'. However, WP:ANYBIO explicitly states regarding awards that a notable subject has "received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times". So, despite Bearcat's assertion in their original post, a person must receive multiple major award nominations to qualify. Thus, despite the Hilary Weston's inherent prestige, someone whose only major accolade is a single shortlist does not qualify as 'notable'. The other people shortlisted for the HWP who have Wikipedia articles have achieved other significant recognition or accomplishments in addition to the shortlisting. Perhaps Wong will achieve indisputably sufficient notability in the future but, by Wikipedia's standards, she hasn't done so yet. TheAnayalator (talk) 06:17, 6 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep: one of her books being topic of a major national TV show is equivalent to a visual artist satisfying "(b) been a substantial part of a significant exhibition". Plenty of RS showing coverage to satisfy WP:GNG even if she could be argued not to pass WP:NAUTHOR. Pam  D  10:58, 6 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Pinging since you endorsed my prod. TheAnayalator (talk) 22:37, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
 * my apologies: I made a mistake on that. I was a bit hasty and misread a couple key aspects of the notability issue when I endorsed the prod. (Let it be known I make mistakes now and then, although it is not often.) Bearcat's argument is also persuasive, so I am on the keep side now. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:37, 9 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep as per TriCity News the book "took a prestigious BC Book Prize from the West Coast Prize Society; the book was also a finalist for CBC’s Canada Reads competition and shortlisted for the $60,000 Hilary Weston Writers’ Trust of Canada Prize for Non-fiction. It made the top 100 books for the Globe and Mail list in 2018 and, last month, it was placed on the long list for the 2019 Stephen Leacock Memorial Medal of Humour." Lots of independent RS talking about Wong because of her book. Qualifies as "won significant critical attention." HouseOfChange (talk) 23:57, 7 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 12:25, 7 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:ANYBIO which states The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times. This woman did not the the Hilary Weston Prize and has only been nominated once. She could possibly be noteworthy in the future but Wikipedia is not a WP:CRYSTALBALL. -- Millionsandbillions (talk) 19:01, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Our notability criteria for writers do not require a person to win a literary award before they're notable — for the top level national awards, being shortlisted is a valid notability claim. But at any rate, the comment directly above yours does demonstrate that she (a) has won a notable literary award, and (b) has been nominated for yet another notable literary award in addition to the Weston and Evans prizes, so she already clears your "multiple nominations" too. Admittedly the Evans and Leacock awards hadn't been noted in the article yet, but they are now, and they are notable AUTHOR-passing awards that can be and have been supported with real reliable sources. Bearcat (talk) 19:26, 8 January 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep, due to what Bearcat says.NotButtigieg (talk) 11:15, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Makes the cut. Passes GNG, etc. Missvain (talk) 06:09, 11 January 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.