Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom Wang


 * 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. Only reason given to keep the article is that others of the kind exist. There is a clear numerical and argumentative consensus to delete based on the lack of coverage in reliable sources. Mkativerata (talk) 23:57, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Tom Wang

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Article is written like an advertisement, and does not establish the notability of the subject. A web search reveals little information on him from reliable third-party sources. Taiwantaffy (talk) 07:24, 27 July 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Taiwan-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:35, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Weak delete There might be some notability in the TV work, but maybe not. Sounds like he's basically a news anchor, and similar articles are sometimes kept but often deleted. In any case nothing is referenced, the article is basically a resume, and it's written so poorly that it often borders on nonsense. I'd reconsider if someone wants to bother with a total rewrite, but as written Wikipedia would definitely be better off without this article. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  18:01, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. TV host. Author. Every minor TV show co-host on CNBC has their own page as a precedent.Cookiehead (talk) 18:18, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Appears to be run of the mill news presenter and scholar. No sources, so article can be BLP prodded. Searches for Tom Wang mostly refer to others. Vanity page and promotional piece. Christopher Connor (talk) 01:01, 8 August 2010 (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.