Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zeng Guo Yuan


 * 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. per WP:BLP, with no prejudice against recreation Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:03, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Zeng Guo Yuan

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

This isn't G10 as the attacks are sourced, but this is still an attack page, and very obviously smear ("Besides that, Zeng has tried to contest in other Singapore elections, though he never qualified due to his ugly criminal records."). The subject himself is also non-notable and contesting for a seat does not make him notable (anyone can do so). His bare few mentions in the news do not merit this article as. If this article is to continue, it should not be written in a blatant attack tone. I don't even know this guy nor have I heard of him very much. &theta;v&xi;r    mag&xi;   spellbook 06:24, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 07:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS JAMMMY &#9734;&#9733; 07:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

 Keep cos guy should be notable enough, considering that he has been featured on national TV, local Singapore newspapers, lots of pages on the Web, etc. Not everyone can contest in an election, at least in SG context; I don't know about foreign policies. Anyways, he contested in the Singapore general election, 1991, at Bukit Timah and garnered close to 30% of the accepted votes. GNG should be met, as there are enough sources and citations to support the need to keep this article. I believe most Singaporeans should know him. --Bonkers The Clown (talk) 12:44, 12 June 2012 (UTC) 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:24, 19 June 2012 (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.