Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zhang Zhaohuan


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 17:01, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Zhang Zhaohuan

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The peacock language used in the article made me doubt the notability. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 19:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The article is very flowery and it needs a rewrite. But Prof. Zhang appears to be notable - try a Google search for "Zhang Zhao-Huan" instead of "Zhang Zhaohuan." It would help if a Chinese-fluent editor can offer assistance in searching out references. Warrah (talk) 20:59, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Well, I am fluent in Chinese, but there are actually not many Chinese references to him on the Web that are of substance, and I don't know the field well enough.  I still believe he's not sufficiently notable, but obviously I understand differences of opinions here.  --Nlu (talk) 05:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —David Eppstein (talk) 07:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Puffery is not per se a reason for deletion. Person is notable as nearly as I can tell.  Collect (talk) 18:41, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, per nom. I do not see evidence of satisfying WP:ACADEMIC here, sich as significant citability of his work. Kinoq (talk) 14:50, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relist. This needs to be relisted. I fear that we need a more thorough investigation of the sources, including a search by his Chinese name. Precipitously deleting this article would be bad, but it is also possible that Google is right and his contributions are minimal. Abductive  (reasoning) 00:28, 11 November 2009 (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.