Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Low Kay Hwa


 * 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. per SK1 - No valid reason has been presented and I'm assuming WP:Before wasn't followed, Anyway consensus is to keep (non-admin closure) – Davey 2010 Talk 22:18, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Low Kay Hwa

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

non-notable SuDongWan (talk) 16:57, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as according to this newspaper source the Strait times he is one of the most popular authors in Singapore, also this source says one of his books was the top google book download in Singapore  Atlantic306 (talk) 17:43, 12 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep as is famous in his own country, search on google Singapore confirms this. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 19:45, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:GNG – rather niche but Google does turn up multiple feature-length articles in independent sources . This news piece referenced in the article also states that he is "known for his teen romance novels", and although it's pap astrology he's also gotten a section here. — Nizolan  (talk) 00:03, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — Nizolan  (talk) 00:04, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. — Nizolan  (talk) 00:04, 13 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Per Atlantic306, I would say satisfies WP:AUTHOR as he seems to be one of the most popular authors in Singapore. The article however has come COI issues and some of the facts may need verification. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 05:26, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep Easily satisfies WP:AUTHOR. Also, see WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP Smartyllama (talk) 17:51, 15 April 2016 (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.