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. ✗plicit 01:00, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jiabao Li (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

I don't think this meets WP:N. All of the sources in the article fall into one of three categories:

• primary (e.g. artworks on the subject's website)
• aren't independent from the subject (e.g. there's sources from UT Austin, Endless Health, and ONX Studio, but she has a direct connection to all three of these institutions)
• is a listing (e.g. her name is mentioned on the finalist lists for some awards, but these do not contain in-depth coverage of the subject)

A Google search doesn't reveal any sources that meet all three of these criteria, and a scan of her Google Scholar page doesn't reveal any papers that would establish notability. HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:20, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. If this subject is notable, the editors most fervently averring such would do well to make that much more visible to the rest of the community by cutting the use of primary sources and original research from the article, as it is Wikipedia policy to for articles to focus on summarizing the findings of reliable, independent, secondary sources. Wikipedia is itself a tertiary source, not a secondary source. As is, the barrage of links on the page is more hindrance than help. P-Makoto (she/her) (talk) 03:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I'm not seeing evidence of notability. Agnescooper, coopgalvin, Zerokelvins69: which three of the referrences, in your opinion, do most to establish that she is notable? Maproom (talk) 07:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. The subject isn't 100% non-notable. They are regarded in a Fast Company listicle, a recipient of a Webby Award, were interviewed in a South China Morning Post podcast, among a couple of presentations at well-known conferences. Other than that, though the current sourcing is either WP:MREL or WP:GUNREL, and because we have high standards for WP:BLP, those won't work. It's possible WP:ARTIST can be argued here with some effort, but for now the article would anyways need a gigantic revamp. TLA^tlak 08:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The photograph JiabaoLi.jpg is, we read, Zerokelvins69's "own work". We can infer from the effort that has obviously gone into the photograph that this (Zerokelvins69's sole contribution to Commons) was taken with considerable cooperation from the subject, who even uses it in her "about" page. Perhaps Zerokelvins69 has some COI here. -- Hoary (talk) 09:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Maybe, maybe not. I wouldn't want to give Wikipedians the impression that getting the cooperation of a subject for a photograph will get them accused of COI. In any case, supposing that the editors who most fervently edited this article are complete strangers to Li doesn't make the article better or make the topic fulfill the notability guideline. COI seems irrelevant to the decision to delete. P-Makoto (she/her) (talk) 02:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  In any case, I asked Commons to speedy the image as a copyvio because the subject's website fails to indicate that the photographer has release her photo under a compatible license. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 14:56, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Written like a CV, with primary sources and weasel words. Ref bombed list of "Exhibitions and festivals" way over the top for an encyclopedic article. WP:PROMO WP:TOOSOON. Agree that signs point to COI or Undisclosed paid. The two main editors are now blocked https://xtools.wmcloud.org/articleinfo/en.wikipedia.org/Jiabao_Li. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: All of the over 150 references provided are from unreliable sources, are promotional, do not have a proper referencing style, and/or are self-published. HarukaAmaranth ^春_香, 08:53, 28 February 2024 (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.