Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wah Yan College Cats


 * 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. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 06:31, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Wah Yan College Cats

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Previously deleted per CSD and later restored. There is little established notability to justify the existence of this article. It appears to be dominated heavily by content which has not been attributed properly - most likely original research, as the article history shows that it has only been edited by one registered editor. Additionally per notability guidelines for organizations, there appears to be insufficient secondary reliable sources out there to support this article. At most, I can see this article having a section in the Wah Yan College article, but not its own. Luke! 05:46, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Added some references, removed some redundant parts.-- : Raphaelmak : [ talk ] [ contribs ] 06:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, also see a search on the organization's Chinese name (華仁愛貓組). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Raphaelmak (talk • contribs) 06:48, 4 April 2007 (UTC).


 * Delete Lovely work, although it doesn't belong to Wikipedia.--K.C. Tang 07:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge to Wah Yan College, Hong Kong - although it may not have gained enough notablility, however, per WP:NOTE and WP:MERGE: "One common recommendation across all notability guidelines is not to nominate articles on such subjects for deletion but to rename, refactor, or merge them into articles with broader scopes, or into the articles that discuss the main subject, which may be created if they do not already exist."; "If a page is very short and cannot or should not be expanded terribly much, it often makes sense to merge it with a page on a broader topic." I think it is possible to merge it with an article of broader scope, in this case, Wah Yan College, Hong Kong.-- : Raphaelmak : [ talk ] [ contribs ] 08:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Merge I figured it was just something made up in school one day, but it looks like they got themselves written about in Ming Pao? Can someone with a subscription take a look at that? Thanks, cab 09:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletions.   cab 09:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment What's the policy on secondary school organisations? I think I remember an article about some computer programming team at La Salle getting deleted.  Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 18:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Will this camp expand to be a large nonprofit shelter home? One of the links said the organization applied for "financial assistance from the Quality Education Fund (QEF)".  At the moment the contents are quite personal, like the name of cats etc. This page is linked from Animal Cruelty.  You sure you want this to represent animal shelters in Hong Kong?? Benjwong 21:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment deletion debates have nothing to do with whether people "want this to represent animal shelters in Hong Kong". Linking this from Cruelty to animals is a pretty clear example of undue weight, but the decision to keep or delete this article rests on the usual criteria WP:V, WP:N, WP:RS. Though IMO this is a perfect example of something that's newsworthy but not encyclopedically notable, it should at least be given a mention (and the sources from this article attached) on the Wah Yan College page, given that it is the subject of articles in two mainstream HK newspapers (South China Morning Post and Ming Pao), which is more notice than most secondary school organisations usually attract. cab 23:59, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There doesn't seem to me much encyclopedia-worthy content worth merging. Of course, we could decide to IAR from here on, and keep all well-written or clever articles in WP regardless of subject. It would simplify some of these discussions. DGG 01:04, 5 April 2007 (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.