Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lu Zhiwei


 * 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. Daniel.Bryant 06:37, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Lu Zhiwei
The page fails to meet the notability criteria for academics; in addition Prof.Zhiwei recieves zero hits on Google Scholar (although, of course, this does not suffice as the primary reason for Deletion under any circumstances according to the notability criteria for academics. Anthony 17:48, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article clearly asserts notability (university president, one of the developers of pinyin, and member of the Chinese Academy of Sciences). Google Scholar is not very useful for non-recent publications, especially outside sciences and outside English-language publications. OTOH, I find a number of hits on his name in Google Books and a few in JSTOR. All in all (and without spending too much time on it), I get the impression that he was important. It would be useful if somebody reading Chinese sources would look at it. up+land 18:32, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep per up+land. A developer of pinyin is automatically notable even in English Wikipedia. -- Bpmullins 19:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong, Speedy Keep. Kay, I don't blame the nominator because you probably can't read Chinese. But this was a very respected scholar in China.

I am not familiar with Google Scholars but I am assuming it's generally for English authors. If you actually typed in "Lu Zhiwei" in Google Books as mentioned above, you will find many results. Let me just point some obvious out on Mr. Lu according to the notablity criteria:

1. The person is regarded as a significant expert in his or her area by independent sources.
 * I don't have the sources in my hand, but Mr. Lu was selected, and remained as the president of Yenching University for 25 years because of his expertise in psychology, linguistics and music.

2. The person is regarded as an important figure by those in the same field.
 * K, for this one I'll just quote it from the English article. "He was one of the original developers of Pinyin. He was an academician of the Chinese Academy of Sciences." I don't understand how you came up with "fails notablity criteria".

3. The person has published a significant and well-known academic work.
 * The Chinese Wiki listed five books. Those are just the major ones. He's made various other publishings according to the Chinese Wiki.

4. The person's collective body of work is significant and well-known.
 * The Chinese Government Linguistic Website. The page I gave you here included most of Mr. Lu's published book, "古音说略", "汉语构词法", "诗韵谱".

5. The person is known for originating an important new concept, theory or idea.
 * I'll requote the sentence in English Wiki. "He was one of the original developers of Pinyin". Also, according to Chinese Wiki, Mr. Lu was also one of the first to introduce Western psychology concept into China. He's made many other Chinese linguistic contributions according to a bio in the Chinese Academy of Sciences.

There are even Chinese BIOGRAPHIES on him.

After listing all of those reasons, I came to a conclusion that the fact that you can't read Chinese is no excuse. The notablity guide clearly states that if the person meets ONE criteria, he is notable. AQu01rius (User | Talk | Websites) 19:14, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep if sourced, delete otherwise. ~ trialsanderrors 20:06, 20 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep Google Scholar is probably not a good source for Chinese early work (ie only Chinese characters) Arnoutf 20:45, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep passes wp:prof if one goes outside of the english and systematically biased areas of the web.--Buridan 12:59, 21 October 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.