Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shek Yam East Estate


 * 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   redirect to Public Housing Estates in Kwai Chung. Looks like we have a satisfactory external solution. Thanks WP:HK Spartaz Humbug! 07:13, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Shek Yam East Estate

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable apartment buildings. Three Google News in Chinese are bus plunge articles on petty crimes that occurred there. Deprodded. Abductive (reasoning) 17:04, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I added more English links to support its existance. I know that reference articles rather than English are allowed in English Wikipedia. They are not bus plunge articles. If you don't know Chinese language, please let me know. Ricky@36 (talk) 23:57, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The tagging history of the article is confusing: is there still a request for deletion, or simply a request for improvement? Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 04:04, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I prod-tagged this a while ago, and User:Ricky@36, the article's creator, deprodded it. After it became apparent that no further improvement was possible or forthcoming, I nominated it for deletion. Ricky@36 added the expand tag. Ricky@36 has created many articles on these housing developments, some of which are notable and some of which I suspect are not. Abductive  (reasoning) 04:17, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I have added several links to support the article. Now only you are not satified with the condition. I don't know why you chase to delete the article. My final plan is to finish all the public housing estates of Hong Kong, no matter big or small to show the integrity of the category of "Category:Public housing estates in Hong Kong. You will destroy the plan if you asked deletions. Ricky@36 (talk) 04:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You are engaged in a project to add every single public housing estate in Hong Kong, a "completionist" agenda. According to this there are 196 estates operated by the Hong Kong Housing Authority, and 20 estates by the Hong Kong Housing Society. Now, I have sampled some of the articles on these estates, and most of them are notable, but some are not. Notability is a special term on Wikipedia which mean more than just proving it exists, which we call "verifiability". Please see WP:N and WP:V for a fuller discussion of these ideas. The way the Article for Deletion process works is that other people comment here until consensus is reached on whether or not the topic of the article is appropriate for Wikipedia. You and I have said what we think, and now it is the turn of other members of the community to weigh in. Abductive  (reasoning) 05:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * When I write every article, I provide enough sources and reference which shows their existance. Notability is very subjective. Once you don't know the articles, you could say "notiability". I challenged with so many Wiki users on that. Fortunately, most of my articles could be reserved finally. If you tag more articles, I am so sorry that I don't know have time to comment with you on every article. Ricky@36 (talk)
 * The reason you often are challenged is that there are something like 135,800 high-rise apartment buildings in the world. I get this figure by assuming there is one such building for every 25,000 people living in urban areas, which are home to about half the world's 6.79 billion people. That is, high-rise buildings hold 20% of the population of the Earth. Abductive  (reasoning) 09:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I would like to keep this article and the others for Hong Kong. While I am in no way linked to Ricky@36, I have followed his very good work on Hong Kong related articles, and I tend to support his "completionist" agenda for public housing estates. Public housing estates play a major role in Hong Kong society, history, culture, and even economy. I believe that if we end up having an article for the ~200 of them, these articles will definitely have an important "group value". On a different level, think of the groups of buildings bundled together for the recent UNESCO world heritage sites declarations. Also, in the very dense urban planning of Hong Kong, these housing estates essentially play the roles of villages or towns in other locations: they typically have several thousands inhabitants, shopping centers, schools, elderly homes, bus terminuses, etc. Finally, information on these public housing estates are scattered across various websites, and it is a valuable work to gather this information in individual articles.Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 09:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If these estates are as important as you say, then you should have no trouble finding sources that say this one is notable. Abductive  (reasoning) 09:44, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I talked about "group value", not about this specific one.Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 09:45, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * If no third party sources exist for an estate, it can still be listed, but not redlinked, in List of public housing estates in Hong Kong. Abductive  (reasoning) 09:58, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It is very unlikely that no third party source exist for any given estate in Hong Kong, since 1) most of them are listed on emporis.com 2) there are always governement (LegCo) discussions and information about estates posted on the Hong Kong governement websites, in addition to 3) the website of the Hong Kong Housing Authority itself.Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 10:55, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think your criticisms are useless. The housing estates are developed by the Hong Kong Government. It is reasonable that I use sources from the government. Besides the government sources, I also put links from several private websites (some are in Chinese) to verify their existance. If you are free to challange people, I am sorry that I don't have time to deal with you. Ricky@36 (talk) 15:50, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Emporis is a wiki, and given that emporis tries to list all the multi-story buildings in the world, a listing there does nothing to establish notability. Government of HK and HKHA websites aren't third-party, and even if they were, they don't say anything about this project to convince me that it is notable. Abductive  (reasoning) 11:01, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I could provide enough sources to support the articles, but you said the sources are not reliable. It is just your thought, not fair. Please help find your "reliable" sources. No one could reach your "ideal" target. Ricky@36 (talk) 16:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Abductive, what do you want, really? Establish the notability of Shek Yam East Estate? what about the widely used rule that every human settlement deserves an entry in Wikipedia? French communes, all 36,000 of them are considered as Wikipedia worthy, so why not a 6,500 people estate in Hong Kong? and after all why not all 135,800 high-rise apartment buildings in the world? added to the 2,983,962 existing Wikipedia articles, that's not much, for places that are central to people's lives. Besides, your arguments are confusing: are you trying to 1) request reliable sources evidencing the mere existence of Shek Yam East Estate, or 2) push us to prove its notability (I have already mentioned that it is not notable per se but as part of a group, but I am not sure that you got this point, unless this is what you are calling "project", but again this point of yours was not clear), or 3) just willing to chat with people? Underwaterbuffalo (talk) 16:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Haha, Abductive is a very ideal person. He/she needs us to reach his/her ideal requirements to fit his/her "notiblity" target. Ricky@36 (talk) 07:36, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * That's not a fair characterization. I have even added a reference establishing notability to the article on Telford Garden and removed the notability tag placed there by another user as a demonstration. Abductive  (reasoning) 07:55, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It is because Telford Garden is not written by me. You are now only concerned about my articles, and try to find ways to suggest deletions to fit your "deletion" aims. Is it right, isn't it? Previously, I met some editors who are trying to delete the articles, but I explained to them and they finally accepted my explanation and gave up deletions. However, although you do it in a wrong way, you still think that you are right to do it. Ricky@36 (talk) 09:13, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * According to Henrik's tool, Shek Yam East Estate gets 6.2 page views a day. That does not convince me that this housing project is of broad, encyclopedic interest. Abductive  (reasoning) 09:24, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Is it a good reason to explain your point? Don't give any excuses to support your point, since many people, besides me, disagreed with your point. Ricky@36 (talk) 09:28, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, only one person, oliver/UnderwaterBuffalo, agrees with you. Abductive  (reasoning) 09:30, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The fact that I am the only vocal one does not really prove that no other people agree. Anyway this discussion is going nowhere, and I would appreciate to know what Abductive suggests to do with the content of the article. Just wipe it out from the servers? olivier (talk) 10:15, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know. It isn't like the data doesn't appear on the Hong Kong Housing Authority's website. They have a very nice page devoted to Shek Yam East, with a street map, and photos. Abductive  (reasoning) 10:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, lifebaka++ 20:44, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep Umofomo (talk) 21:08, 14 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: Bottom section moved to Articles for deletion/Public housing in Hong Kong. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 22:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep as for other large housing projects/estates/complexes of this kind. As for page views, anything that gets 6 a day = 2000 a year. Two thousand people reading an article is way enough. I wouldn't even say that something that got 6 views a year should be deleted on such a basis--if I can write an article and help 6 people find information they need, I'd think my time very well spent.  Wikipedia  is not an abridged encyclopedia.    DGG ( talk ) 00:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 *  Keep . Verified.  Seems a suitable topic for the encyclopedia.  Does not seem prone to promotion problems that require WP:N compliance.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 07:01, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * What sources attest the the notability of this particular project? What is the project notable for? Here is what the article says "Shek Yam East Estate is a comparatively small public housing estate for Hong Kong standards, comprising three 39-floor residential buildings, without market and shopping centre;. It comprises a total of 2,500 apartments, with sizes ranging from 13.6 to 49 m2. The authorized population was 6,500 at the end of 2007." (Emphasis mine).
 * Why is this sort of article suitable for an encyclopedia? In the rest of the world there are tens of thousands of similar apartment complexes. And how about all the suburban subdivisions? If I created an article on Pine Glade subdivision (there's one in Colorado and one in Maryland), what could I say? "Some developer built a subdivision in such-and-so neighborhood of such-and-so town, which has 410 ranch style houses. The population of the subdivision is 1,209." Abductive  (reasoning) 08:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * In principle, I think housing estates should be part of the encyclopedia on everything. However, articles need secondary sources to attest to someone else being interested.  I just examined 6/7 of the references, and I find them all to be primary source material.  I could find no secondary source material on the web before coming up with mirrored wikipedia content.  I think secondary sources for these estates must surely exist, but in their absence, we shouldn't have the article because we have no secondary sources to guide the content.  Perhaps if there was a standard for articles covering housing estates, then it could be justified by arguing "comprehensibility of coverage".  undecided  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 10:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * (This is not really part of the discussion) Pine Glade subdivision might not deserve an article, according to the current inclusion criteria of Wikipedia, but "410 ranch style houses" sparks my interest. Is there any place in Wikipedia where one can read about such developments? olivier (talk) 10:13, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You mean in general? Subdivision (land) is the article. Creating an article on an individual subdivision is nigh on impossible; they are generally so un-noteworthy that one can't even find out who built them or when they were built without going to the county archives in person. Back when I was tagging places in WikiMapia (which has no notability requirements) I dabbled in labeling subdivisions, but could rarely find trustworthy data. Abductive  (reasoning''') 10:45, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep due to efforts at improvement and persuasive arguments that subject is verifiable. If it is not a hoax and is important to some segment of our readers and can be presented coherently then that is good enough for our purposes.  Best, --A NobodyMy talk 05:41, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I am in the process of merging the public housing articles per consensus achieved at WPHK, which will result in a redirect of this link to a new parent article Public Housing Estates in Kwai Chung. Ohconfucius (talk) 05:14, 21 August 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.