Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fong She Mei

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.

SarahStierch (talk) 16:57, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply

]

Fong She Mei

)

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

I suspect this is an autobiography, and I can't see that she is particularly notable either. Now if user:Qworty was here, it would be mercilessly edited to remove "unreliable sources", tagged as requiring more sources, and the author personally insulted on the talk page. As it is, I just think it should be quietly deleted. Barney the barney barney (talk) 09:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC) Barney the barney barney (talk) 09:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (chinwag) @ 09:16, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (post) @ 09:16, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Sir Rcsprinter, Bt (warn) @ 09:17, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Can't seem to find a single ghit, unless she is widely known by a different name. 069952497a^{Comments and complaints}_{Stuff I've done} 21:59, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This article is about a Hong Kong based author. I've added her Chinese name, taken from the
WP:AUTHOR. Funny ^Pika! 00:22, 29 May 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JohnCD (talk) 21:39, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:36, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not meet N or GNG, also the Chinese language wiki has no sources to use either. Doesn't even make a claim of notability. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 01:49, 8 June 2013 (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.