Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yeung Chan


 * 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. clpo13(talk) 23:36, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Yeung Chan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non notable local woodworker/carpenter. Wrote one self-published book, and once worked in local furniture business. No independent sources, no evidence of notability. –Ammarpad (talk) 07:19, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOTLINKEDIN WP:NOTFACEBOOK WP:NOTPROMOTION Acnetj (talk) 07:40, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 11:36, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 11:36, 3 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. MT Train Talk 11:38, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Deb (talk) 17:57, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment, nom is incorrect about book being selfpublished, lark is an imprint of Sterling Publishing which in turn is part of Barnes & Noble.Coolabahapple (talk) 22:42, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It looks like you're correct: Lark appears to be selective, based on their submission guidelines page. Largoplazo (talk) 23:02, 6 May 2018 (UTC)


 * "Self-published" doesn't mean you printed it your parlour with handheld printer!, thats where you are missing the point. It means you paid for it, you paid commercial publishers and they published it irrespective of their credibility. It wasn't thoroughly vetted by independent external experts. It wasn't chosen from competing entries. It was only routinely read by proofreaders and ordinary editors to fix grammar mess and style issues. But that doesn't make it academic book. –Ammarpad (talk) 03:55, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * really? thanks for that.Coolabahapple (talk) 08:57, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I know that's what self-published means. Where do you see that Lark charges the author for their services? I've seen self-publishing sites, and didn't see where this resembled one. Largoplazo (talk) 09:31, 7 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment, Classic Joints appears to be a "go to" book for this subject, WorldCat shows it is held by around 200 libraries (not just in the US but even in UK, NZ, and OZ!:)), with the couple of reviews cited in the article, the review here and mentions here and here, i would be comfortable with a wikiarticle on the book, although not sure if there is enough for a standalone about the author. Coolabahapple (talk) 23:03, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
 * We are not discussing book here. You can create article for it, notability for books is very loose. But here we are discussing notability of the person himself, not magazine review of his book. –Ammarpad (talk) 03:55, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
 * thanks for enlightening me on this, i do tend to go off on a tangent at times, but hang on, have you heard of that little notability guideline, WP:NAUTHOR (evidently not from your above words), point 3 talks of the person creating a significant or well-known work (book) or works (books) that have been subject to multiple articles or reviews, so discussing someones book(s) is certainly relevant to this afd. Coolabahapple (talk) 12:59, 7 May 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.