Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tsai Ling-yi


 * 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. Seems consensus that suitable sources are in place and that NPOL is satisfied by the position (non-admin closure) Nosebagbear (talk) 21:13, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Tsai Ling-yi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Failed to meet notability criterion. It's gonna be awesome! ✎ Talk♬ 18:38, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Taiwan-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:50, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:50, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:50, 28 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep. See the much longer Chinese-language article at https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E8%94%A1%E4%BB%A4%E6%80%A1 That article has 16 references, although some may not be from reliable sources. In addition, search for the name in CHinese characters here:  Eastmain (talk • contribs) 22:41, 28 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. I have added many references. As a former Second Lady of Taiwan, Tsai Ling-yi has received significant coverage in reliable and independent sources, and therefore meets the general notability guideline. For more information, see Chinese article zh:蔡令怡 on Chinese Wikipedia. --Neo-Jay (talk) 04:01, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - Meets GNG per the references added by Neo-Jay to the article + those available on the Chinese Wiki. Bennv3771 (talk) 07:30, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - A second lady is a notable topic already by itself. United States can have its second lady article. Why can't Taiwan? There is third party resources already, there is photo, there is the detailed DOB etc. Yes I know it may not be as complete as the United States' one. But if we keep deleting the less notable topics, those less notable will even be less noticeable in the foreseeable future, while the indisputably notable will just even keep growing, overshadowing the smaller or lesser well-known countries. Chongkian (talk) 05:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I still feel the current version is rather short but has improved a lot. -- It's gonna be awesome! ✎ Talk♬ 08:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Length or lack thereof is not a good rationale for deletion. Deletion is usually the last resort for articles. In any case, a well-executed WP:BEFORE would have led to WP:POLOUTCOMES and WP:NPOL, as well as the reliable sources added by Neo-Jay. Vycl1994 (talk) 14:17, 4 September 2018 (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.