Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shangwen Fang (2nd nomination)


 * 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   delete. Fritzpoll (talk) 10:18, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Shangwen Fang
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:BLP1E - person famous for one event. WP:NOTNEWS may also apply here. While this may have been a well-reported story at the time, it does not seem to me to have demonstrated lasting notability; the 'edits to Wikipedia' section also raises problems with self-reference. If this is kept, it should be renamed to something like '2006 Taiwan cat abuse incident' - but I'm not convinced we should have an article on the subject at all. Robofish (talk) 19:23, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Per precedence set at Youtube cat abuse incident. Lets  drink  Tea  19:28, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Mild delete. Person was notable at the time, but there has been no reliable updates on his whereabouts or activities, and therefore no reason to believe that the person is notable at this point.  --Nlu (talk) 20:09, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Google research suggests notability even if article doesn't cite particularly good sources. — Ched ~ (yes?)/© 21:22, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment If subject was "notable" at a point in history, that notability continues. Clara Bow has not done much recently, but her past notability maintains article keep-worthy-ness ... whatever, you know what I mean. ;) — Ched ~  (yes?)/© 21:27, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The statement you're making is WP:NTEMP - notability is not temporary. twirligig T tothe C 21:34, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * And the converse of 'notability is not temporary' is that if a person's fame is temporary, then they were never really notable. That's how I understand it, anyway. Robofish (talk) 22:24, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BLP1E and WP:N/CA. If the cat abuse event is notable, there should be an article about the event, not the person. twirligig T tothe C 21:34, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BLP1E and WP:N/CA.Nrswanson (talk) 23:08, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Rewrite to focus on cat abuse incident as an incident; the details of the person's life do not seem relevant, and have caused him harassment. --GRuban (talk) 13:03, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BLP1E and WP:N/CA.Broadweighbabe (talk) 03:35, 20 March 2009 (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.