Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenji Wong

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. Nakon 03:00, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Kenji Wong

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Okay so there is a page in Chinese also that looks like it is under a speedy. Trying to find any notability here. (I had to do some edits on this page first as there were some odd text in a form of Chinese-which I don't know any version of it but I could tell what it was trying to say) Either a userfy or a delete it seems. Wgolf (talk) 16:07, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 February 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 17:53, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:03, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:03, 13 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No indication he passes the notability reauirements for artists or businesspeople.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:22, 14 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Technical keep - he has two significant mentions in two reliable sources, per WP:42. Bearian (talk) 02:57, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Sam ^Sing! 15:45, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:BIO. The sources are dodgy - social media platforms aren't reliable. Philg88 ^♦talk 06:10, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.