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:NOTNEWS and WP:BLP. - KrakatoaKatie 22:22, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wang Jeu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

WP:BLP violation. Unsourced from proper sources, and unnotable. -N 01:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• comment I've sourced it so it is no longer a violation of BLP. No strong opinion on whether to keep it. This seems like a decent example of why we might not need an article on every single sourceable event. If anyone can give sources showing that this in fact had a major impact on animal rights laws in china then change this opinion to a keep. JoshuaZ 02:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I don't think there is a violation of WP:BLP and the references[1] are a proper assertion of notability. Note to AfD closing admin: I have a COI with the subject matter, I'm disgusted by the actions depicted --Javit 02:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 02:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep Gross and awful, but does appear to have made international news. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 04:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an archive of people commiting animal snuffing stunts to get their 15 minutes of internet fame via a video. Per WP:NOT: "Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files" and "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information: ...The fact that someone or something has been in the news for a brief period of time does not automatically justify an encyclopedia article." Edison 05:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• This is an article about a non-notable person (Wang Jeu) who caused a notable ruckes. Since this is an article about the non-notable person I say delete it... however, I think an article about the event can and should be written. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 15:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. The second quotation in Edison's opinion above supplies my rationale. Deor 15:49, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Animal mistreatment does not make you notable. Sure, newspapers may catch it and write about it, but it remains a news story of a fairly minor event, not one of lasting encyclopedic interest. Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Despite how notable she may or may not be, this event is referenced moderately on several discussion/image boards, the names of which are bound not to be shared by rules 1 and 2. If this article is to be deleted because it's "not of lasting encyclopedic interest", you may as well delete all music from Wikipedia that didn't sell over 1,000,000 copies, any movies that grossed very little, TV shows that got cancelled. In short, it's illogical to do such a thing.
  • You might want to read WP:ILIKEIT. Zunaid©® 08:47, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per my arguments on the archived WP:NOTNEWS talkpage. This is a one-shot news event which belongs in Wikinews, not an encyclopedia. Zunaid©® 08:47, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. WP is not a newspapper. - Nabla 14:34, 15 June 2007 (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.