Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/China

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
中華/中华 Welcome to WikiProject China
(changes)
Chinese article statistics

This list is automatically updated every night around 3 AM (UTC)
Shortcut
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to China. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|China|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to China. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Asia.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


China

[edit]

2025 Qianxi tourist boat capsizings

[edit]
2025 Qianxi tourist boat capsizings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA - Routine kinds of news events (including most .. accidents ..) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable. No WP:CONTINUEDCOVERAGE after the spike of news reports following the event. XYZ1233212 (talk) 15:44, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and China. XYZ1233212 (talk) 15:44, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Selective merge/redirect to Qianxi, Guizhou per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. The event happened on 4 May 2025. Less than a month after the event, it is unknown whether sources will continue covering the subject in the future to demonstrate it is notable. Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Duration of coverage says:

    However, this may be difficult or impossible to determine shortly after the event occurs, as editors cannot know whether an event will receive further coverage or not. That an event occurred recently does not in itself make it non-notable.

    I support a selective merge of between one sentence to a paragraph to the history section of the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard (talk) 08:53, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Xinyang bus fire

[edit]
Xinyang bus fire (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability, and high-casualty bus crashes are common. Fails WP:EVENT. Unable to find sustained significant coverage. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:51, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Chen, Hao 陈浩 (2012). 做事做到位 [Do Things Thoroughly] (in Chinese). Beijing: China Industrial and Commercial United Publishing House 中华工商联合出版社. ISBN 978-7-5158-0129-2. Retrieved 2025-06-01 – via Google Books.

      The book notes: "据新华网北京2011年7月25日电：7月22日凌晨发生在河南信阳境内的京珠高速公路卧铺客车燃烧事故系事故车上非法携带、运输的易燃化工产品引发大火所致。2011年7月22日凌晨4时许，一辆由山东威海开往湖南长沙的严重超载（核载35人，实载47人）双层大客车在京珠高速由北向南938公里又700米处突发大火燃烧，造成41人死亡，6人受伤，其中1人重伤。事故发生的原因只是由于乘务人员对乘客随身携带物品疏于检查，没有将事情做到位，致使易燃化工产品被带上车，引发惨案。"

      From Google Translate: "According to Xinhuanet Beijing 25 July 2011: The fire accident of a sleeper bus on the Beijing-Zhuhai Expressway in Xinyang, Henan Province in the early morning of 22 July was caused by the flammable chemical products illegally carried and transported on the bus. At about 4:00 am on 22 July 2011, a severely overloaded (35 people were rated, 47 people were actually loaded) double-decker bus from Weihai, Shandong Province to Changsha, Hunan Province suddenly caught fire at 938 kilometers and 700 meters from north to south on the Beijing-Zhuhai Expressway, killing 41 people and injuring 6 people, including 1 seriously injured. The cause of the accident was simply that the crew neglected to check the passengers' carry-on items and did not do things properly, resulting in flammable chemical products being brought on board, causing a tragedy."

    2. Brown, Jeremy (2013). "When Things Go Wrong: Accidents and the Legacy of the Mao Era in Today's China". Restless China. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. p. 16. ISBN 978-1-4422-1510-8 – via Google Books.

      The book notes: "Overloaded buses are unsafe because they are difficult to turn, slow down, and evacuate. They are also more likely to blow up. On July 22, 2011, a double-decker sleeper bus in Henan raced through the night with forty-seven passengers on board—twelve over capacity. Only eight people were on board when the bus started its journey in Shandong, but it gradually filled up along the way. According to a Caixin report, "Bus conductors regularly solicit passengers from outside the stations," overloading buses because they "operate on low profit margins." Passengers who board buses on the side of the road stow their luggage quickly, never getting close to the security screening machines installed in many bus stations. Flammable chemicals stored in the sleeper bus's luggage compartment exploded around 4 a.m., causing a massive conflagration that killed forty-one people. News about this "especially major" accident was quickly overwhelmed by coverage of the high-speed train collision outside Wenzhou the next day, even though the bus disaster killed one more person than the train crash did."

    3. Dong, Fenglong 董凤龙 (2012-08-28). "湖北全面排查长途卧铺客车 1000公里以上需设休息站" [Hubei Launches Comprehensive Inspection of Long-Distance Sleeper Buses — Rest Stops Required for Routes Over 1,000 Kilometers]. Chutian Metropolis Daily [zh] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "去年7月22日凌晨，一辆卧铺客车在信阳发生火灾，造成41人死亡 ... 鉴于多起重大车祸都发生在凌晨，去年信阳“7·22”特大车祸发生后，公安部和交通运输部出台措施：对超长途连续运行的卧铺客车，积极推行凌晨2时至5时临时停车休息的措施。但因不是强制执行，效果并不明显。... 去年信阳“7·22”特大客车爆燃事故，是因为非法使用卧铺大巴来运输本应由冷藏车运输的易燃易爆化工品。"

      From Google Translate: "In the early morning of July 22 last year, a sleeper bus caught fire in Xinyang, killing 41 people ... Given that many major car accidents occurred in the early morning, after the "7.22" major car accident in Xinyang last year, the Ministry of Public Security and the Ministry of Transport introduced measures: for sleeper buses that run continuously over long distances, the measures of temporary parking and rest from 2 to 5 a.m. were actively promoted. However, because it is not enforced, the effect is not obvious. ... The "7.22" major bus explosion accident in Xinyang last year was caused by the illegal use of sleeper buses to transport flammable and explosive chemicals that should have been transported by refrigerated trucks."

    4. "近30年7-9月危化品重特大事故发生18起，精细化工行业事故最多" [In the Past 30 Years, 18 Major Hazardous Chemical Accidents Occurred Between July and September, with the Fine Chemicals Industry Having the Most Incidents]. Jiemian News (in Chinese). 2019-07-18. Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "2011年7月22日3时43分，京珠高速公路河南省信阳市境内发生一起特别重大卧铺客车燃烧事故，造成41人死亡、6人受伤，直接经济损失2342.06万元。事故直接原因是：鲁K08596号大型卧铺客车违规运输15箱共300公斤危险化学品偶氮二异庚腈并堆放在客车舱后部，偶氮二异庚腈在挤压、摩擦、发动机放热等综合因素作用下受热分解并发生爆燃。"

      From Google Translate: "At 3:43 on 22 July 22 2011, a particularly serious sleeper bus fire accident occurred in Xinyang City, Henan Province, on the Beijing-Zhuhai Expressway, causing 41 deaths, 6 injuries, and direct economic losses of 23.4206 million yuan. The direct cause of the accident was that the large sleeper bus No. Lu K08596 illegally transported 15 boxes of dangerous chemicals totaling 300 kilograms of azobisisoheptanitrile and piled them in the rear of the bus cabin. Azobisisoheptanitrile was decomposed by heat and exploded under the combined effects of extrusion, friction, engine heat release, etc."

    5. "24起特重大事故起最高检派员" [Prosecutors Dispatched by Supreme People's Procuratorate for 24 Especially Major Accidents]. Legal Evening News (in Chinese). 2015-09-23. pp. A22 – A23.

      The article notes: "调查用时最长的是2011年京珠高速河南信阳“7·22”特别重大卧铺客车燃烧事故，超过1年。"

      From Google Translate: "The longest investigation time was the "7.22" special major sleeper bus burning accident in Xinyang, Henan Province on the Beijing-Zhuhai Expressway in 2011, which took more than 1 year."

    6. "湖南特大车祸现车辆运危化品乱象，办运输许可证仅需打点" [Major Traffic Accident in Hunan Reveals Chaos in Hazardous Chemical Transport — Transport Permits Can Be Obtained with Just Some 'Connections']. The Paper (in Chinese). 2014-07-22. Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "前车之鉴犹在眼前。2011年7月，京珠高速公路河南信阳段发生特大卧铺客车燃烧事故，致41人死亡。事故调查组发布报告显示，承运危化品的汇昌公司没有运输危化品偶氮二异庚腈的专用车辆和人员，最终通过大客车替代专用冷藏车运送。"

      From Google Translate: "The lesson of the past is still fresh in our minds. In July 2011, a sleeper bus on the Beijing-Zhuhai Expressway in Xinyang, Henan Province, caught fire, killing 41 people. The accident investigation team released a report showing that Huichang Company, which was transporting hazardous chemicals, did not have special vehicles and personnel to transport the hazardous chemical azobisisoheptanonitrile, and eventually used buses instead of special refrigerated trucks for transportation."

    7. "错上加错致43人遇难" [One Mistake After Another Led to the Deaths of 43 People]. Beijing Morning Post [zh] (in Chinese). 2014-07-21. Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "这起惨烈事故与2012年陕西省延安市境内“8·26”特大交通事故和2011年京珠高速河南信阳“7·22”特别重大卧铺客车燃烧事故非常相似：出事车辆都是长途卧铺客车，死伤人数几乎是“全军覆没”，都是遭遇了装有易燃化学品罐车追尾。而且，事故发生时间都在凌晨：延安特大交通事故发生在2点40分许，京珠高速特别重大事故发生在3点43分，而此次事故则发生在3点左右。早在京珠高速公路“7·22”特别重大卧铺客车燃烧事故发生后，最终上报国务院的调查报告在“事故防范和整改措施建议”部分，特别强调要进一步积极研究推行提升道路客运安全的政策标准，尤其要合理确定营运线路、车型和时段，严格控制1000公里以上的长途客运班线。"

      From Google Translate: "This tragic accident is very similar to the "8.26" major traffic accident in Yan'an City, Shaanxi Province in 2012 and the "7.22" major sleeper bus burning accident on Beijing-Zhuhai Expressway in Xinyang, Henan Province in 2011: the vehicles involved in the accident were long-distance sleeper buses, and the number of casualties was almost "annihilated". They were all rear-ended by tank trucks loaded with flammable chemicals. Moreover, the accidents occurred in the early morning: the Yan'an major traffic accident occurred at around 2:40, the Beijing-Zhuhai Expressway major accident occurred at 3:43, and this accident occurred at around 3 o'clock. As early as after the "7.22" major sleeper bus burning accident on Beijing-Zhuhai Expressway, the investigation report that was finally submitted to the State Council emphasized in the "Suggestions on Accident Prevention and Rectification Measures" section that it is necessary to further actively study and promote policy standards to improve road passenger transportation safety, especially to reasonably determine the operating routes, vehicle models and time periods, and strictly control long-distance passenger routes of more than 1,000 kilometers."

    8. Huang, Yangtan 黄羊滩 (2014-07-20). "新京报："红眼客运"禁令为何形同虚设" [Beijing News: Why Is the 'Red-Eye Passenger Transport' Ban Merely an Empty Gesture?]. The Beijing News (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "2011年京珠高速河南信阳“7·22”特大卧铺客车燃烧事故殷鉴不远，... 早在2011年信阳“7·22”事故发生后，国家有关部门曾出台长途客运车辆管理措施，要求严控1000公里以上的跨省长途客运班线和夜间运行时间；2012年7月国务院也出台《关于加强道路交通安全工作的意见》，要求积极推行长途客运车辆凌晨2时至5时停止运行或实行接驳运输。湖南省相关部门也曾开会落实国务院的意见要求。"

      From Google Translate: "As early as after the "7.22" accident in Xinyang, Henan Province in 2011, the relevant state departments had issued management measures for long-distance passenger vehicles, requiring strict control of inter-provincial long-distance passenger routes of more than 1,000 kilometers and night operation time; in July 2012, the State Council also issued the "Opinions on Strengthening Road Traffic Safety Work", requiring the active promotion of long-distance passenger vehicles to stop running or implement shuttle transportation between 2 am and 5 am. Relevant departments in Hunan Province also held a meeting to implement the opinions and requirements of the State Council."

    9. "2011年京珠高速41人死亡事故调查报告公布：违规运输化学品所致 10人被批捕" [Investigation Report Released on 2011 Jingzhu Expressway Accident That Killed 41: Caused by Illegal Transport of Chemicals, 10 People Arrested]. Yicai Global [zh] (in Chinese). 2012-06-28. Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "昨日，国家安监总局在其官方网站公布了京珠高速河南信阳“7·22”特别重大卧铺客车燃烧事故调查报告。事故的直接原因是该事故车辆违规搭载危险化学品。被逮捕的相关责任人共有10人。被建议给予党纪、政纪处分人员共有32人。"

      From Google Translate: "Yesterday, the State Administration of Work Safety released the investigation report on the "7.22" extremely serious sleeper bus burning accident on the Beijing-Zhuhai Expressway in Xinyang, Henan Province on its official website. The direct cause of the accident was that the accident vehicle was illegally carrying dangerous chemicals. A total of 10 people were arrested. A total of 32 people were recommended to be punished by party and government discipline."

    10. Shi, Wenjing 时文静 (2013-12-27). "信阳"7.22"特大卧铺客车燃烧事故案一审宣判" [First Trial Verdict Announced in Xinyang '7.22' Major Sleeper Bus Fire Case]. Dahe Daily (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01 – via People's Daily.

      The article notes: "记者从河南省高级人民法院获悉，12月27日上午，京港澳高速河南信阳“7.22”特别重大卧铺客车燃烧案，信阳市中级人民法院作出一审判决。被告人杨立论、杨立良二人犯以危险方法危害公共安全罪, 判处无期徒刑；邹建洲、王恩典、李晓东、赵中华、刘昌珍犯重大责任事故罪，分别判处有期徒刑六至二年。"

      From Google Translate: "The reporter learned from the Henan Provincial High People's Court that on the morning of 27 December, the Xinyang Intermediate People's Court made a first-instance judgment on the "7.22" particularly serious sleeper bus burning case on the Beijing-Hong Kong-Macao Expressway in Xinyang, Henan. The defendants Yang Lilun and Yang Liliang were convicted of endangering public safety by dangerous means and sentenced to life imprisonment; Zou Jianzhou, Wang Endian, Li Xiaodong, Zhao Zhonghua, and Liu Changzhen were convicted of major responsibility accidents and sentenced to fixed-term imprisonment of six to two years respectively."

    11. Bai, Shikang 白世康, ed. (2014-04-19). "致42人死亡客车燃烧事故两责任人被判无期" [Two Responsible for Bus Fire That Killed 42 Sentenced to Life Imprisonment] (in Chinese). Xinhua News Agency. Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "2011年7月22日凌晨，一辆从山东威海驶往湖南长沙的大客车在京珠高速信阳明港附近发生燃烧，共造成42人死亡，5人受伤。之后，在国务院相关部门的组织协调下，经河南、山东两省有关部门认真调查，基本查清此次事故系有关人员违反易燃易爆化工产品包装和运输规定，非法使用卧铺客车运输应由冷藏车运输的易燃易爆化工产品所导致的特别重大责任事故。"

      From Google Translate: "In the early morning of 22 July 2011, a bus from Weihai, Shandong to Changsha, Hunan, caught fire near Xinyang Minggang on the Beijing-Zhuhai Expressway, killing 42 people and injuring 5. Afterwards, under the organization and coordination of relevant departments of the State Council, the relevant departments of Henan and Shandong provinces conducted a serious investigation and basically found out that the accident was caused by the relevant personnel violating the regulations on the packaging and transportation of flammable and explosive chemical products and illegally using sleeper buses to transport flammable and explosive chemical products that should be transported by refrigerated trucks."

    12. "信阳"7·22"特大卧铺客车燃烧事故案一审宣判两人被判无期" [First Trial Verdict Announced in Xinyang '7·22' Major Sleeper Bus Fire Case: Two Sentenced to Life Imprisonment]. Hebi Daily (in Chinese). Xinhua News Agency. 2013-12-28. Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "2011年7月21日10时许，汇昌公司工作人员张辉在威海将10箱偶氮二异庚腈装上开往长沙长途客车，后张辉又让杨立论中途送去5箱，一并堆放在客车车厢后部。次日凌晨3时40分许，该车行至山东省菏泽市境内时已超载至４７人。当车辆行驶到京港澳高速９３８ｋｍ＋１１５ｍ处，因偶氮二异庚腈在不符合危险品包装、运输的环境中长时间挤压、摩擦，受热分解，发生爆燃，包括张辉在内的42人死亡。"

      From Google Translate: "At about 10:00 on 21 July 2011, Zhang Hui, a staff member of Huichang Company, loaded 10 boxes of azobisisohexylnitrile on a long-distance bus to Changsha in Weihai. Later, Zhang Hui asked Yang Lilun to deliver 5 boxes midway and stacked them together in the rear of the bus. At about 3:40 a.m. the next day, the bus was overloaded with 47 people when it reached Heze City, Shandong Province. When the vehicle reached the 938km+115m mark on the Beijing-Hong Kong-Macao Expressway, azobisisobutyronitrile exploded due to prolonged squeezing and friction in an environment that was not suitable for the packaging and transportation of dangerous goods, resulting in thermal decomposition and death. 42 people, including Zhang Hui, died."

    13. Wang, Jianhua 王剑华 (2012-11-29). "轻视安全血的教训 公安部通报道路交通事故十大典型案例" [Bloody Lessons from Ignoring Safety — Ministry of Public Security Releases Ten Typical Road Accident Cases]. Information Daily [zh] (in Chinese).

      The article notes: "违法装载危险品车毁人亡痛惊心时间：2011年7月22日地点：京港澳高速公路河南信阳境内定性：特别重大道。2011年7月22日3时43分，山东威海市交通运输集团有限公司驾驶人邹建洲驾驶 鲁K08596号大型卧铺客车，乘载47人(核载35人)，行驶至河南省信阳市境内，车厢内违法装载的易燃危险化学品突然发生爆燃，客车起火燃烧，造成41人死亡、6人受伤。教训与启示：此次事故中，货主在明知偶氮二异庚腈属于易燃、易爆、有毒危险化学品的情况下，隐瞒货物性质，托运偶氮二异庚腈，违反了《危险化学品安全管理条例》的有关规定。鲁K08596号卧铺客车超载并混装，运输过程中挤压、摩擦、发动机放热等因素导致危险品爆燃。"

      From Google Translate: "Illegally loaded dangerous goods caused vehicle crash, causing death and heart-wrenching time: 22 July 2011. Location: Beijing-Hong Kong-Macao Expressway, Xinyang, Henan. Classification: Special heavy road. At 3:43 on 22 July 2011, Zou Jianzhou, driver of Shandong Weihai Transportation Group Co., Ltd., drove a large sleeper bus No. Lu K08596, carrying 47 people (35 people), to Xinyang, Henan Province. The flammable and dangerous chemicals illegally loaded in the car suddenly exploded, and the bus caught fire, causing 41 deaths and 6 injuries. Lessons and inspirations: In this accident, the cargo owner concealed the nature of the cargo and consigned azobisisoheptanonitrile, knowing that it was a flammable, explosive, and toxic dangerous chemical, which violated the relevant provisions of the "Regulations on the Safety Management of Dangerous Chemicals". The sleeper bus No. Lu K08596 was overloaded and mixed, and the extrusion, friction, and engine heat release during transportation caused the dangerous goods to explode."

    14. "延安特大车祸 3人逃生36人遇难" [Major Traffic Accident in Yan'an: 3 Survive, 36 Killed]. City Evening News [zh] (in Chinese). 2012-08-27. Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01 – via Sina Corporation.

      The article notes: "事实上，自去年京港澳高速河南信阳段“7·22”客车燃烧致41人死亡事件发生后，超长途卧铺客车安全问题已经引起国家有关部门的高度关注。2011年7月24日，交通运输部决定对卧铺客车实行特别监管措施，提出卧铺客车必须强制安装车载视频装置，推行凌晨2时至5时临时停车休息。"

      From Google Translate: "In fact, since the "7.22" bus burning incident on the Beijing-Hong Kong-Macao Expressway in Xinyang, Henan Province, which killed 41 people, the safety of ultra-long-distance sleeper buses has attracted great attention from relevant national departments. On 24 July 2011, the Ministry of Transport decided to implement special regulatory measures on sleeper buses, proposing that sleeper buses must be equipped with on-board video devices and implement temporary parking for rest from 2 am to 5 am."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow the subject to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 08:26, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 Shandong factory explosion

[edit]
2025 Shandong factory explosion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Point 4 of WP:EVENTCRITERIA - Routine kinds of news events (including most .. accidents ..) – whether or not tragic or widely reported at the time – are usually not notable unless something further gives them additional enduring significance. XYZ1233212 (talk) 04:58, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete, random news story and not subject to sustained secondary coverage. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:20, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Selective merge/redirect to List of explosions#27 May 2025 Shandong explosion, where the subject is already mentioned, per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion. The event happened on 27 May 2025. Less than a week after the event, it is unknown whether sources will continue covering the subject in the future to demonstrate it is notable. Wikipedia:Notability (events)#Duration of coverage says:

    However, this may be difficult or impossible to determine shortly after the event occurs, as editors cannot know whether an event will receive further coverage or not. That an event occurred recently does not in itself make it non-notable.

    I support a selective merge of between one sentence to a paragraph to the "Details" column of the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article. A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future. Cunard (talk) 09:08, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wuxi bus accident

[edit]
Wuxi bus accident (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Causing deaths and being reported in the news do not confer notability, and high-casualty bus crashes are common. Fails WP:EVENT. Unable to find sustained significant coverage. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 04:22, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. "杭州"最美司机"：生命最后76秒拯救24名乘客" [Hangzhou's 'Most Beautiful Driver': Saved 24 Passengers in the Final 76 Seconds of His Life]. 愛崗敬業好榜樣：核心價值觀員工讀本 [A Good Example of Loving One's Post and Being Dedicated: Core Values Employee Handbook] (in Chinese). Beijing: Xinhua News Agency. 2015. pp. 33–36. ISBN 978-7-5166-1199-9. Retrieved 2025-06-01 – via Google Books.

      The book notes: "在车速每小时百公里的车内，被飞入车中的5斤重铁片砸中，相当于颗微型炸弹击中。2012年5月29日，杭州长运公司的司机吴斌正是被这样一块飞入车中的铁片刺入腹部。他临危不惧，忍痛用1分16秒缓缓靠边停车。站起来请乘客报警，并且嘱咐：“别乱跑，注意安全。”最终，24名乘客无一受伤，48岁的吴斌却伤重不治。“最美司机”生命最后1分16秒的视频在网上热传。一位网民评论：只有当敬业成了习惯，深入骨髓，才有可能在生命的最后瞬间爆发出超出想象的能量。吴斌是杭州长运客运二公司的快客司机。5月29日中午，他驾驶着浙A19115大型客车从无锡返回杭州，车上有24名乘客。11时40分左右，车行驶至锡宜高速公路宜兴方向阳山路段时，一块大铁片突然从天而降，在击碎挡风玻璃后，砸向吴斌的腹部和手臂。监控录像记录下短暂而令人震动的画面：被击中时的一瞬间，吴斌看上去很痛苦，本能地用右手捂了一下腹部。但他没有紧急刹车或猛打方向盘，而是强忍着巨痛缓缓减速，拉起手刹，开启双跳灯并打开车门。"

      From Google Translate: "Being hit by a 5-jin iron sheet flying into a car at a speed of 100 kilometers per hour is equivalent to being hit by a miniature bomb. On May 29, 2012, Wu Bin, a driver of Hangzhou Changyun Company, was stabbed in the abdomen by such an iron sheet flying into the car. He was not afraid of danger and slowly pulled over to the side of the road in 1 minute and 16 seconds. He stood up and asked the passengers to call the police, and told them: "Don't run around, pay attention to safety." In the end, none of the 24 passengers were injured, but the 48-year-old Wu Bin died of his injuries. The video of the last 1 minute and 16 seconds of the life of the "most beautiful driver" went viral online. A netizen commented: Only when dedication becomes a habit and goes deep into the bone marrow, can it be possible to burst out energy beyond imagination in the last moment of life. Wu Bin is an express bus driver of Hangzhou Changyun Passenger Transport Company No. 2. At noon on May 29, he drove the Zhejiang A19115 large passenger bus from Wuxi to Hangzhou with 24 passengers on board. At around 11:40, when the car was driving on the Yangshan section of the Xiyi Expressway in the direction of Yixing, a large piece of iron suddenly fell from the sky, shattered the windshield, and hit Wu Bin's abdomen and arm. The surveillance video recorded a brief but shocking scene: Wu Bin looked very painful at the moment of being hit, and instinctively covered his abdomen with his right hand. But he did not brake suddenly or slam the steering wheel, but endured the great pain and slowly slowed down, pulled the handbrake, turned on the double jump lights and opened the door."

    2. Li, Yuming; Li, Li, eds. (2019). The Language Situation in China. Vol. 4. Boston: De Gruyter. ISBN 978-1-5015-1741-9. ISSN 2195-9838. Retrieved 2025-06-01 – via Google Books.

      The book notes: "最美司机: 'the most beautiful driver'. The accolade for Wu Bin (吴斌), a bus driver in Hangzhou (杭州). While driving, Wu was hit by an iron block, which caused a rupture in her liver. Though beautiful severely injured, Wu securely stopped the car, saving the lives of 24 driver' passengers on board. Wu died eventually. The term now refers to drivers who have done good deeds."

    3. Ci, Weige 茨威格 (2013). 没有如果只有结果 [No Ifs, Only Results] (in Chinese). Beijing: China Federation of Industry and Commerce Press 中华工商联合出版社. ISBN 978-7-5158-0447-7. Retrieved 2025-06-01 – via Google Books.

      The book notes: "吴斌是杭州长运客运二公司的快客司机，跑杭州至无锡的路线。2012年5月29日中午，他驾驶浙A19115大型客车从无锡返回杭州，车上有24名乘客。11时40分左右，车行驶至锡宜高速公路宜兴方向阳山路段时，一块大铁片突然从天而降，在击碎挡风玻璃后，砸向吴斌的腹部和手臂。面对突如其来的致命打击和后面惊慌的乘客，作为司机的吴斌会怎么做？监控画面记录下他当时坚强的1分16秒："

      From Google Translate: "Wu Bin is a driver of the express bus of Hangzhou Changyun Passenger Transport Company No. 2, running the route from Hangzhou to Wuxi. At noon on 29 May 29 2012, he drove the large bus Zhejiang A19115 from Wuxi to Hangzhou with 24 passengers. At around 11:40, when the bus was driving to the Yangshan section of the Xiyi Expressway in the direction of Yixing, a large iron sheet suddenly fell from the sky, smashed the windshield, and hit Wu Bin's abdomen and arm. Faced with the sudden fatal blow and the panicked passengers behind him, what would Wu Bin, as a driver, do? The surveillance footage recorded his 1 minute and 16 seconds of strength at that time:"

    4. Bai, Fengguo 白凤国 (2015). 忠誠乾淨擔當：做最好的幹部 [Loyal, Clean, and Responsible: Being the Best Cadre] (in Chinese). Beijing: Xinhua News Agency. p. 82. ISBN 978-7-5166-1554-6. Retrieved 2025-06-01 – via Google Books.

      The book notes: "“最美司机”吴斌是杭州一位优秀的客车驾驶员，“平凡48年、伟大76秒”。2012年5月29日，他驾驶大客车从无锡返回杭州途中，一块铁块从对面车道飞来砸中他的腹部和手臂，导致其三根肋骨被撞断，肝脏被击碎，在危急关头，他强忍剧痛，镇定地完成换挡、刹车等一系列操作，确保了大客车上24名旅客的安全，而自己却因伤势过重献出了年仅48 岁的宝贵生命。吴斌身上集中体现了临危不惧、忠于职守的工作态度和爱岗敬业、忘我奉献的崇高品质，成力我们学习的榜样。"

      From Google Translate: "Wu Bin, the "most beautiful driver", is an excellent coach driver in Hangzhou, with "48 years of ordinary life and 76 seconds of greatness". On 29 May 29 2012, he was driving a coach from Wuxi to Hangzhou when a piece of iron flew from the opposite lane and hit his abdomen and arm, causing three of his ribs to be broken and his liver to be shattered. At the critical moment, he endured the severe pain and calmly completed a series of operations such as shifting gears and braking, ensuring the safety of 24 passengers on the coach, but he sacrificed his precious life at the age of 48 due to serious injuries. Wu Bin embodies the work attitude of fearlessness in the face of danger and loyalty to duty, as well as the noble qualities of dedication and selfless devotion, and has become a role model for us to learn from."

    5. Zhang, Hongwei 张红卫; Yan, Quansheng 严全盛; Zhou, Zhongbin 周中斌 (2015-03-06). Chen, Dong 陈东 (ed.). "平凡路上，吴斌精神不断传承" [On the Ordinary Road, Wu Bin's Spirit Continues to Be Passed On]. Hangzhou Daily (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2015-03-19. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "吴斌的故事仿佛依然发生在昨天，可是我们手机上的日历，其实已悄然翻过近3年。 在“3·5”学雷锋日前夕，中宣部向全社会公布了首批50个全国学雷锋活动示范点和50名全国岗位学雷锋标兵，杭州长运“吴斌车队”班组被列入全国学雷锋活动示范点。这个车队，就是最美司机吴斌生前所在的杭州长运运输集团有限公司客运二公司。2012年6月，吴斌英雄事迹发生后，这支英雄的团队被浙江省交通运输厅命名为“吴斌车队”。"

      From Google Translate: "Wu Bin's story seems to have happened yesterday, but the calendar on our mobile phones has quietly turned over nearly three years. On the eve of the "March 5" Lei Feng Day, the Central Propaganda Department announced the first batch of 50 national Lei Feng activity demonstration sites and 50 national Lei Feng role models to the whole society. The Hangzhou Changyun "Wu Bin Team" team was included in the national Lei Feng activity demonstration site. This team is the Passenger Transport Company No. 2 of Hangzhou Changyun Transportation Group Co., Ltd. where the most beautiful driver Wu Bin worked before his death. In June 2012, after Wu Bin's heroic deeds, this heroic team was named "Wu Bin Team" by the Zhejiang Provincial Department of Transportation."

    6. "杭州"最美司机"吴斌就是死于类似事故" [Hangzhou's 'most beautiful driver' Wu Bin died in a similar accident]. Yangtse Evening Post (in Chinese). 2015-05-09. Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01 – via Sina Corporation.

      The article notes: "“杭州最美司机”吴斌是杭州长运客运二公司的快客司机。2012年5月29日中午，他驾驶着浙A19115大型客车从无锡返回杭州，车上有24名乘客。11时40分左右，车行驶至锡宜高速公路宜兴方向阳山路段时，一块大铁片突然从天而降，在击碎挡风玻璃后，砸向吴斌的腹部和手臂。"

      From Google Translate: ""Hangzhou's most beautiful driver" Wu Bin is a fast passenger driver of Hangzhou Changyun Passenger Transport Company No. 2. At noon on 29 May 2012, he drove a large passenger bus with license plate number Zhejiang A19115 from Wuxi back to Hangzhou with 24 passengers on board. At around 11:40, when the bus was driving on the Yangshan section of the Xiyi Expressway in the direction of Yixing, a large piece of iron suddenly fell from the sky, smashing the windshield and hitting Wu Bin's abdomen and arm."

    7. Li, Peng 李鹏 (2018-06-05). Dong, Jie 董洁 (ed.). "6年前的今天 杭州全城惜别一位司机 他叫吴斌" [Six years ago today, the whole city of Hangzhou bid farewell to a driver. His name was Wu Bin.] (in Chinese). Zhejiang Online. Archived from the original on 2018-06-14. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "6年前的今天，也就是2012年6月5日上午8时，吴斌的追悼会在杭州市殡仪馆举行。近3000名社会各界人士自发前往，送别这位“平民英雄”，时任杭州市长亲致悼词。他说：1分16秒，吴斌用生命诠释责任。吴斌的事迹震撼杭城，感动中国。他是最美司机，最美杭州人。... 杭州长运客运二公司驾驶员吴斌勇救24名乘客的壮举，传遍祖国大江南北。在英雄出殡的1个多小时路程中，上万居民自发上街送别，表达对英雄无限的崇敬和无尽的思念之情。"

      From Google Translate: "Six years ago today, at 8 a.m. on 5 June 2012, Wu Bin's memorial service was held at the Hangzhou Funeral Home. Nearly 3,000 people from all walks of life went there spontaneously to bid farewell to this "civilian hero", and the then mayor of Hangzhou delivered a eulogy. He said: In 1 minute and 16 seconds, Wu Bin interpreted responsibility with his life. Wu Bin's deeds shocked Hangzhou and moved China. He is the most beautiful driver and the most beautiful Hangzhou person. ... The heroic act of Wu Bin, a driver of Hangzhou Changyun Passenger Transport Company No. 2, who bravely rescued 24 passengers, spread across the country. During the more than one hour journey of the hero's funeral, tens of thousands of residents spontaneously took to the streets to bid farewell, expressing their infinite respect and endless longing for the hero."

    8. "吴斌：最美司机的最后一次停车" [Wu Bin: The Last Stop of the Most Beautiful Driver]. Justice Web [zh] (in Chinese). 2013-01-21. Archived from the original on 2025-06-01. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "吴斌身受重伤，却忍着剧痛标准地完成了靠边停车、拉手刹、打开双闪灯等一系列保障安全的动作，让行驶在高速上的大巴稳稳停下，还挣扎着站起来，疏导24名乘客安全离开。随后吴斌被送往中国人民解放军无锡101医院抢救，经医院诊查发现，吴斌肝脏破裂、多根肋骨折断，生命垂危。6月1日凌晨，吴斌经抢救无效去世。"

      From Google Translate: "Wu Bin was seriously injured, but he endured the severe pain and completed a series of safety actions such as pulling over, pulling the handbrake, turning on the double flash lights, etc., so that the bus on the highway stopped steadily. He also struggled to stand up and guided 24 passengers to leave safely. Wu Bin was then sent to the Wuxi 101 Hospital of the Chinese People's Liberation Army for rescue. The hospital found that Wu Bin's liver was ruptured and multiple ribs were broken, and his life was in danger. In the early morning of June 1, Wu Bin died after ineffective rescue."

    9. Gong, Xiao 龚晓 (2021-01-25). "省委宣传部、省文明办慰问全国道德模范吴斌家属" [Provincial Publicity Department and Civilization Office Extend Condolences to the Family of National Moral Model Wu Bin]. 浙江文明网 [Zhejiang Civilization Network] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2021-03-05. Retrieved 2025-06-01.

      The article notes: "1月25日，受中宣部、中央文明办委托，省委宣传部副部长、省文明办主任卢春中，看望全国道德模范、“最美司机”吴斌的母亲范敬珍老人，并送去慰问金。杭州市、下城区等有关部门陪同慰问。"

      From Google Translate: "On 25 January, Lu Chunzhong, Deputy Minister of the Provincial Party Committee Propaganda Department and Director of the Provincial Civilization Office, visited the mother of Wu Bin, a national moral model and the "most beautiful driver", and sent condolence money. Relevant departments such as Hangzhou City and Xiacheng District accompanied the condolence."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow the subject to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 03:27, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pro-Republic of China

[edit]
Pro-Republic of China (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a random assortment of support-for-the ROC-related info all lumped together. Some of the people listed have very tenuous connections, e.g. Syngman Rhee, Alexander von Falkenhausen. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is not a reason to delete article. An article of the same name already exists in Chinese Wikipedia, and it is a political term that is also used in reality. In the case of Rhee or Falkenhausen, the link also exists in Chinese Wikipedia, but you can remove it if it's unnecessary; there's no reason why the whole article should be deleted. ProgramT (talk) 07:43, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is not a political term. It is a phrase, like Pro-Israel or Pro-Greenland. Also, this is not the Chinese Wikipedia. The fact that Rhee and Falkenhausen are linked there undermine that Wikipedia's credibility. "Republic of China"/"ROC" is mentioned exactly once in Rhee's article, in the caption identifying Chiang Kai-shek. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:48, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – A content dispute (regarding the examples of Rhee and von Falkenhausen) is not grounds for deletion. Having an "assortment of support-for-the ROC-related info all lumped together" is also not grounds for deletion; list articles are a thing, as are similarly-named and scoped articles like Pro-Americanism and Russophilia. "Other thing exists" arguments aren't policy-based, but I don't see a proposal here based on deletion policy and cannot figure out what the deletion rationale could be. The nominator's disagreements seem to be limited to a content dispute concerning possible WP:OR, rather than a denial of this topic's notability or existence. Yue🌙 19:00, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the nominator had argued for deletion based on WP:SYNTH, with supporting evidence/analysis, I may be sympathetic. But instead they questioned whether Falkenhausen, who served in the military of the ROC, can be called "pro-ROC", which makes this very hard to take seriously. As such, I essentially agree with the two others above that this should be closed as a procedural keep; it could even be argued that this falls under speedy keep criteria 1 or 3. Toadspike [Talk] 13:07, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete The article seems to be a pervasive work of WP:SYNTH that is syncretizing the views of several distinct people based on a tenuous connection to a position on Taiwan. Significant concern regarding accuracy of any citations in this. An article on this topic (albeit one with perhaps a less clumsy name) could definitely exist but I think this one needs WP:TNT. Simonm223 (talk) 15:12, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hm. A TNT may be appropriate here. There is a lot of unsourced and poorly-sourced content. But the article tries to discuss a notable topic (the distinction between "pro-Taiwan" and "pro-ROC") and I'm not sure if deletion is better than trying to clean it up. Toadspike [Talk] 08:18, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Clean-up would have to start with manually reviewing every citation to see if it actually supports what is claimed for it. It's not a small task. Simonm223 (talk) 11:57, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wang Xiaolong (coast guard)

[edit]
Wang Xiaolong (coast guard) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Typical case of WP:1E; otherwise non-notable. To be awarded bravery medals etc posthumously by the state doesn't change that. Schwede66 00:40, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: No other publicly available case of Chinese coast guardsmen(To be exact, the post-2013 chinese coast guard, not the pre-2013 border defense coast guard with the same english name that currently lacks an article) dying in the line of duty. Also had significant coverage. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 00:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see this in a situation similar to the Yang Jia article(except the roles are reversed):
Both are notable mainly due to one event, and both of the articles mainly focus on the people themselves because most of the media coverage focused on the person.
I am open to renaming it to "Death of Wang Xiaolong" instead of deletion, though most of the coverage on him focuses on his entire career and the subject himself Thehistorianisaac (talk) 12:27, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - clearly WP:1E. WP:NOTBLP1E supports deletion as (1) subject only notable for a single event, (2) was low profile outside this event, and (3) the event was not significant and Wang's role was neither substantial nor well documented. I'd normally say keep due to receiving a significant honor, but it doesn't look like it was awarded for personal achievements. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 14:35, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Note:
    This is the first publicly avaliable case since 2013 of a coast guardsman getting killed in action. Additionally, this was highly documented in Chinese media, particularly southern china. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 23:54, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Firstly, being the first coast guard to die is not a notability criterion. Secondly, the coverage is not significant as it is not independent; it's all Chinese media praising someone who received a state award as part of a propaganda effort. That said, merging this information into China Coast Guard#Line of duty deaths is a reasonable AtD. CohenTheBohemian (talk) 04:58, 25 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep just rename. WP:1 says the rule is to cover the event, and so not to have another article. We do not have another article on the event. Just put "death of" in front of the title. PARAKANYAA (talk) 23:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would also agree, but as stated above, this is sort of a similar situation to how we have the article named Yang Jia but not "2008 Zhabei attacks", since a lot of media attention was also about the subject himself. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 23:56, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 08:39, 30 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Casualties of the 2015 Tianjin explosions

[edit]
Casualties of the 2015 Tianjin explosions (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A sad event, but the victims aren't notable. Fram (talk) 17:27, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It's a rather huge event(Compared to 911 on some occasions), and victims lists are pretty common on the article themselves, just that the article itself likely cannot fit the people. Now, I understand Wikipedia:Other stuff exists, but I would say this is about as notable as Lists of victims of the September 11 attacks. Additionally, this list sort of already exists on List of People's Armed Police personnel killed in the line of duty#2010s, and among the casualties is the former deputy chief of the TEDA zone fire brigade and a deputy police chief. Also, see WP:NOTNOTMEMORIAL and WP:NLIST. There is also coverage on casualty related topics, such as the 8th Street Company, the legal status of the private police and firefighters and so on. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 17:43, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I just don´t get the logic. We don´t list the victims for small accidents, as these normally don´t have an article for the event. We don´t lust the victims of truly large events (war, famine, natural disasters) as there are too many, it would be an indiscriminate list, WP:NOTMEMORIAL, take your pick... But for a small group of intermediate events we suddenly have articles to list the victims, even though they aren´t really any different from all these others. Seems completely arbitrary. Fram (talk) 18:07, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLUDGEON
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
@Fram See WP:NOTNOTMEMORIAL and WP:NLIST; The article also includes notable, covered related topics such as the 8th Street Company, which became highly decorated(Possibly most highly decorated fire station(formerly company) in China) and the legal status of the volunteer firefighters and private police, which even Li Keqiang made a comment on.
I may also even include more things such as the timeline of the official casualty count, evacuation efforts and allegations of a higher casualty count later own. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 16:07, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Thehistorianisaac ꧁Zanahary꧂ 17:48, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: Concur with Fram. Event is notable as major industrial accident. Individual casualties are not, unless by some other criteria and those can be included/summarized in the relevant section of the event article. Notable findings from the Chinese Journal of Traumatology source can be added to the main event article; right now it's just being used to verify casualty statistics. It's really stretching to claim that this event is comparable to 9/11; nothing of the sort is mentioned in the event article, and I think it's pretty safe to say this industrial accident was not a major geopolitical event with commensurate global effects lasting decades (and ongoing?) - RovingPersonalityConstruct (talk, contribs) 21:45, 21 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLUDGEON
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • Delete per Fram and RovingPersonalityConstruct. Perhaps further detail of casualties can be added to the main article, but a stand-alone article is not warranted. - Amigao (talk) 01:34, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLUDGEON
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
@Fram@Amigao@RovingPersonalityConstruct
I think I need to clarify something:
The list of victims already existed to some extent on the List of People's Armed Police personnel killed in the line of duty#2010s, however that only included the active service firefighters. The "victims" section of 2015 Tianjin Explosions originally linked to this article.
The only thing the current article does is include volunteer firefighters, police, civilians and adding some context, such as regarding the 8th Street Company, the legal status of the private police and volunteer firefighters. The only thing this article really changes is that the info is easier to access and more complete. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 12:25, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Many of these "killed in the line of duty" articles (not just China, but e.g. the endless US articles) need deletion or severe pruning, but that's a separate discussion. Having part of this information available in another article is not really a reason to create or keep this one. Fram (talk) 12:28, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I do not think the killed in the line of duty articles should be deleted or pruned as line of duty deaths often receive significant coverage and are much-discussed social topics whether in USA or china, in fact many of them need significant expansions; But yeah that's another topic.
Many topics related to Tianjin explosions casualties, as said above, did gain huge coverage by Chinese and foreign media, such as said above, the legal status and eligability for rewards of some of the firefighters and police. Many casualty related topics do have notability but not enough to have their own articles, so I put them here.
I think a victims list is pretty reasonable to include in an article like this, and I really hate to be the WP:OTHERSTUFF guy, but aren't we ignoring the fact that the September 11 attacks have a total of 3 lists + a casualty article? Yes, they are different in nature, but I really need to point out the inconsistencies here.
As stated before, victims lists are also pretty common overall. I think at most this article can simply be merged back to the original. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 14:03, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The original article was pretty much just rushed, currently it has more content and will likely be further expanded. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 4:07, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
  • Delete Per WP:NOPAGE. No independent notability. There's nothing in this article that can't be merged into the parent—if it's not there already. The accident was the notable thing; a list of unfortunates whom it killed is not. It also verges on WP:NOTMEMORIAL. —Fortuna, imperatrix 13:13, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLUDGEON
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • @Thehistorianisaac: You have replied to every delete !vote in this dscussion. Indeed, you've contributed 50% of the edits to this page on your own. Please don't do that, it's considered WP:BLUDGEONing. You've made your points—several times now—and repetition is unhelpful. I suggest you step back and let uninvolved editors make their own minds up (which they will anyway!). Cheers, —Fortuna, imperatrix 14:17, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. We have an independent, reliable source that discusses these people as a group, so WP:NLIST is met. Looking at the article, we have [1][2][3][4]. Given NLIST is for "Stand-alone lists", I read it as superseding NOPAGE; either way, none of the three bolded bullet points under NOPAGE apply here. We have plenty of sources and discussing this topic at length in the main article would be undue.
On previous arguments for deletion: 1. The victims do not have to be notable for the list topic to be (WP:NLISTITEM). 2. The significance of the event does not matter in deciding notability or suitability of a stand-alone list. Neither do comparisons to other events. Toadspike [Talk] 08:40, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I agree. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 11:25, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per Nom. Although we all (or most) sympathize with victims creating a memorial is supposed to be among What Wikipedia is not. See: Wikipedia:Victim lists. There is apparently a source that names the victims. List the number of victims and link to the list. -- Otr500 (talk) 05:34, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Please see Wikipedia:What NOTMEMORIAL is not Thehistorianisaac (talk) 15:05, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:BLUDGEON
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
  • This is not soley a victims list, but also includes information related to casualties during the explosions. Additionally, some of the casualties are notable(but have no wikipedia article and likely will not have one), such as as a deputy fire chief and a deputy police chief. Thehistorianisaac (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, TarnishedPathtalk 13:22, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]



[edit]

Maggie Leung

[edit]
Maggie Leung (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable hostess and actress. Sources are social media which is not WP:RS and the others mentioned the subject in passing or no mention at all. Mekomo (talk) 10:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria, which says:

    People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

    • If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.

    Sources

    1. Chan, Lai-mei 陳麗薇 (2024-10-19). 難忘採訪垃圾屋憶良師教誨 "東張女神母校｜梁敏巧返母校樹仁大學感激栽培　難忘採訪垃圾屋憶良師教誨" [Scoop Goddess Visits Her Alma Mater｜Maggie Leung Returns to Shue Yan University Grateful for Its Guidance — Recalls Covering a 'Trash House' and Cherished Advice from Mentors]. Hong Kong Economic Times (in Chinese). Archived from 難忘採訪垃圾屋憶良師教誨 the original on 2025-05-31. Retrieved 2025-05-31.

      The article notes: "梁敏巧於2013年入讀香港樹仁大學新聞與傳播學系，自2017年畢業後第一次踏足母校，... 由做記者到選港姐，再做《東張》主持，Maggie一步步走來確實不易，這全靠她有一股傲氣與不服輸的性格。Maggie從讀大學開始就自給自足，打4份兼職賺取生活費，她覺得讀大學就是長大了，人大了就要學會養活自己，不想再成為父母的「裙腳女」，所以她去教琴、做PA（節目助理）、做PR（公關）及做市場推廣，兼職的工作，令她實踐到在學校學到的知識。... 在大二那一年，Maggie有機會去北京《人民日報》實習，任職旅遊海外版，3個月的任期令她眼界大開，"

      From Google Translate: "Liang Minqiao enrolled in the Department of Journalism and Communication at Hong Kong Shue Yan University in 2013. This was her first visit to her alma mater since she graduated in 2017. From being a reporter to participating in the Miss Hong Kong pageant, and then to being the host of "East Zhang", it was not easy for Maggie to come this far step by step. This was all thanks to her pride and unyielding character. Maggie has been self-sufficient since she started college, working 4 part-time jobs to earn a living. She felt that going to college meant growing up, and when you grow up, you have to learn to support yourself. She didn't want to be a "skirt girl" for her parents anymore, so she taught piano, worked as a PA (program assistant), a PR (public relations) and did marketing. Part-time jobs allowed her to put into practice what she learned in school. ... In her sophomore year, Maggie had the opportunity to intern at the Beijing People's Daily, working on the tourism overseas edition. The three-month term opened her eyes."

    2. "「東張」女神梁敏巧慶祝27歲生日 曬健康性感相網民兼唔夠喉" ['Scoop' Goddess Maggie Leung Celebrates 27th Birthday — Shares Healthy and Sexy Photos, Netizens Still Want More]. Bastille Post [zh] (in Chinese). 2022-05-25. Archived from the original on 2025-05-31. Retrieved 2025-05-31.

      The article notes: "梁敏巧（Maggie）因為在2019年參加《香港小姐競選》得到進入娛樂圈的門券，入行初期做過兒童節目《Think Big》的主持，形象健康，後來轉做《東張西望》外景主持更累積更多人氣。離開了兒童節目後的Maggie不只言行比從前更大膽、做自己，更大方展現自己的健康性感，衣著打扮亦見清涼。有時Maggie去行山或做運動，都不吝嗇分享自己穿小背心和緊身瑜珈褲的造型，Show off好身材。"

      From Google Translate: "Maggie Leung got a ticket to the entertainment industry by participating in the "Miss Hong Kong Pageant" in 2019. In the early days of her career, she hosted the children's program "Think Big" and had a healthy image. Later, she became a field host of "Dong Zhang Xi Wang" and gained more popularity. After leaving the children's program, Maggie not only became bolder in her words and deeds and became herself, but also showed her health and sexiness more generously, and her clothes were also cool. Sometimes when Maggie goes hiking or exercising, she is not stingy to share her look in a small vest and tight yoga pants to show off her good figure."

    3. Dou, Dou 杜杜 (2024-01-22). "獨家丨梁敏巧為拍劇乜都得：除咗露3點 「東張女神」唔介意落水透Bra出鏡" [Exclusive丨Maggie Leung Will Do Anything for Acting: Except Showing All 3 Points — 'Scoop Goddess' Doesn’t Mind Getting Wet and Revealing Bra On Camera]. Sing Tao Daily (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-05-31. Retrieved 2025-05-31.

      The article notes: "梁敏巧（Maggie）2019年參加港姐入行，2021年加入《東張西望》做外景主持，由於採訪夠搏命，更試過遭被訪者襲擊，加上樣靚有身材而獲封「東張女神」。Maggie認為做藝人肯搏肯捱是基本，更希望有機會挑戰演戲，最想合作是欣賞多時的人夫男神黎諾懿。"

      From Google Translate: "Maggie Leung entered the industry by participating in the Miss Hong Kong pageant in 2019, and joined "East Zhang West Wang" as a location host in 2021. Because of her risk-taking in interviews, she was even attacked by the interviewees, and she was named the "East Zhang Goddess" for her good looks and figure. Maggie believes that being willing to fight and endure is the basic requirement for being an artist, and she hopes to have the opportunity to challenge acting. The person she most wants to work with is Lai Lok Yi, a married man whom she has admired for a long time."

    4. "「東張女神」梁敏巧大爆港姐內幕及離地趣聞 試過有佳麗唔知咩係八達通？" ['Scoop Goddess' Maggie Leung Reveals Miss Hong Kong Pageant Secrets and Out-of-Touch Anecdotes — Some Contestants Didn't Even Know What an Octopus Card Was?] (in Chinese). Yahoo News. 2022-06-01. Archived from the original on 2025-05-31. Retrieved 2025-05-31.

      The article notes: "「東張女神」梁敏巧（Maggie）較早前開設個人YouTube頻道，早前邀請好友黃丹虹（Vickie）擔任影片嘉賓，齊齊大爆參加香港小姐及ViuTV真人騷《廣告女皇》嘅內幕。現年27歲嘅梁敏巧，曾就讀於樹仁大學新聞與傳播學系，畢業後成為一名記者。喺2019年，佢覺得人生苦悶，好想做一啲嘢去衝擊一下，於是佢就參選香港小姐，當年嘅冠亞軍佳麗分別係黃嘉雯、王菲及古佩玲。 "

      From Google Translate: "Maggie Leung recently opened her personal YouTube channel and invited her friend Vickie Wong as a video guest to reveal the inside story of her participation in Miss Hong Kong and the ViuTV reality show "Advertising Queen". Leung Min-chiu, 27, studied journalism and communication at Shue Yan University and became a journalist after graduation. In 2019, she felt that life was boring and wanted to do something to make an impact, so she contested Miss Hong Kong. The winners and runners-up were Ka-man Wong, Faye Wong and Koo Pei-ling."

    5. Kwong, Yuk Ying 鄺鈺瑩 (2021-10-26). "梁敏巧變新《東張》女神　靠兒童節目訓練：我比較蠢要每事問" [Maggie Leung Becomes the New 'Scoop' Goddess — Trained Through Children's Programs: 'I'm a Bit Slow, So I Have to Ask About Everything']. HK01 (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2025-05-31. Retrieved 2025-05-31.

      The article notes: "加入無綫兩年嘅梁敏巧(Maggie），自兒童節目《Think Big天地》結束後，隨即獲安排做《東張西望》外景主持，最近終於獲網友留意，封她做新晉《東張》女神。不過要知道《東張》專題報導不時充滿危機，對於做慣廠景嘅Maggie嚟講，確係大挑戰。"

      From Google Translate: "Maggie Leung, who has been with TVB for two years, has been arranged to be the outdoor host of "Tong Cheung Sai Wang" after the end of the children's show "Think Big World". However, it is indeed a big challenge for Maggie, who is used to being a factory scene, to know that the special reports in Dong Chang are full of crises from time to time."

    6. "梁敏巧哭訴阿媽爛賭輸層樓 悲慘身世揭秘丨星桄伴我心" [Maggie Leung Tearfully Reveals Her Mother's Gambling Problem Lost Them a Flat — Tragic Backstory Uncovered丨'Starlight Walk With Me']. East Week (in Chinese). 2024-11-26. Archived from the original on 2025-05-31. Retrieved 2025-05-31.

      The article notes: "梁敏巧參選2019年香港小姐入行，雖然當年未有獲得任何獎項，但她就靠《東張西望》成功打響名堂。兒時的梁敏巧已經擁有一副明星相，五官標緻，十分可愛。... 儘管有一個廿四孝爸爸，但Maggie坦言自己在一個不健康的家庭中成長，皆因有一個爛賭的媽媽。"

      From Google Translate: "Maggie Leung entered the industry by contesting Miss Hong Kong 2019. Although she did not win any awards, she succeeded in making a name for herself with "East and West". As a child, Leung Min-chiu already had a star-like appearance, with beautiful features and very cute... Despite having a filial father, Maggie admitted that she grew up in an unhealthy family because of a bad gambling mother."

    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Maggie Leung (Chinese: 梁敏巧) to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 09:32, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sleek Flow

[edit]
Sleek Flow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is about a startup that fails to meet the relevant notability guidelines (WP:NCORP). There aren't sources that discusses the subject in depth, and the sources are mostly sponsored, routine announcements of raisings etc..., and talk about the founder other than the business itself. Also note that this source, while it meets WP:SIGCOV, it might also be sponsored by the way. ToadetteEdit (7M articles) 15:39, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 22:31, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep There are sources in the article that provide significant and independent coverage. My own search also found several other reliable sources. The article's current state could benefit from editing, particularly in the introduction.Jitendra indulkar (talk) 08:29, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - To the 2 keep !votes who have very few edits outside this AfD, I will ask for a list of the "significant coverage" that shows this meets WP:NCORP as I am not seeing it and apparently neither did the nominator. Prior to listing a WALLOFTEXT, keep WP:NEWSORGINDIA in mind. --CNMall41 (talk) 16:45, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies

[edit]
Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article is about a private academic/educational organization. There are only 3 sources: and all 3 are from the organization's own website.

Hence, no independent sources, therefore fails the WP:V and WP:Notability requirements.

Log says that an article of the same name was deleted in the past, but I cannot find that older AfD. Noleander (talk) 13:11, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is a well-known independent institution in Hong Kong. Multiple local news agencies have reported findings of such institute which they are well cited.
https://news.mingpao.com/pns/%E6%B8%AF%E8%81%9E/article/20250328/s00002/1743099198748/%E4%B8%AD%E5%A4%A7%E4%BA%9E%E5%A4%AA%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80%E6%B0%91%E8%AA%BF-63-%E6%8C%87%E7%8F%BE%E9%9D%9E%E8%B2%B7%E6%A8%93%E6%99%82%E6%A9%9F-42-%E6%96%99%E4%BE%86%E5%B9%B4%E8%B7%8C%E5%83%B9
https://hk.on.cc/hk/bkn/cnt/news/20241111/mobile/bkn-20241111134821159-1111_00822_001.html
https://www.inmediahk.net/node/%E6%94%BF%E7%B6%93/%E3%80%90%E8%B2%A1%E6%94%BF%E9%A0%90%E7%AE%97%E6%A1%88%E3%80%91%E4%B8%AD%E5%A4%A7%E6%B0%91%E8%AA%BF%EF%BC%9A%E4%BA%94%E6%88%90%E5%8D%8A%E5%B8%82%E6%B0%91%E6%84%9F%E4%B8%8D%E6%BB%BF-%E6%BB%BF%E6%84%8F%E5%83%858%EF%BC%85
Articles from secondary sources on this institute include
https://baike.baidu.com/item/%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E4%BA%9A%E5%A4%AA%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80/7260339
https://onthinktanks.org/think-tank/%E9%A6%99%E6%B8%AF%E4%BA%9E%E5%A4%AA%E7%A0%94%E7%A9%B6%E6%89%80/
Please let me know if you are unsatisfied with what I have provided and would like more or something else, thank you. Ilovefood123123 (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The first three sources cite the organization's work without anything about the organization itself. The Baidu Baike entry is another online encyclopedia, and onthinktanks.org is a directory listing with content likely provided by the organization. Oblivy (talk) 23:07, 18 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cunard Hi there I’m not sure if you would have the time of doing so but could you please take a look and see if you could try finding related sources to this article, since you have similarly done so in the past. Thank you very much. Ilovefood123123 (talk) 12:21, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are numerous mentions of the institute in sources which has made it difficult to determine whether there is significant coverage of it. Cunard (talk) 21:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Agent 007 (talk) 15:06, 24 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:39, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]


[edit]

Pro-Republic of China

[edit]
Pro-Republic of China (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a random assortment of support-for-the ROC-related info all lumped together. Some of the people listed have very tenuous connections, e.g. Syngman Rhee, Alexander von Falkenhausen. Clarityfiend (talk) 03:33, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This is not a reason to delete article. An article of the same name already exists in Chinese Wikipedia, and it is a political term that is also used in reality. In the case of Rhee or Falkenhausen, the link also exists in Chinese Wikipedia, but you can remove it if it's unnecessary; there's no reason why the whole article should be deleted. ProgramT (talk) 07:43, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is not a political term. It is a phrase, like Pro-Israel or Pro-Greenland. Also, this is not the Chinese Wikipedia. The fact that Rhee and Falkenhausen are linked there undermine that Wikipedia's credibility. "Republic of China"/"ROC" is mentioned exactly once in Rhee's article, in the caption identifying Chiang Kai-shek. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:48, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – A content dispute (regarding the examples of Rhee and von Falkenhausen) is not grounds for deletion. Having an "assortment of support-for-the ROC-related info all lumped together" is also not grounds for deletion; list articles are a thing, as are similarly-named and scoped articles like Pro-Americanism and Russophilia. "Other thing exists" arguments aren't policy-based, but I don't see a proposal here based on deletion policy and cannot figure out what the deletion rationale could be. The nominator's disagreements seem to be limited to a content dispute concerning possible WP:OR, rather than a denial of this topic's notability or existence. Yue🌙 19:00, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • If the nominator had argued for deletion based on WP:SYNTH, with supporting evidence/analysis, I may be sympathetic. But instead they questioned whether Falkenhausen, who served in the military of the ROC, can be called "pro-ROC", which makes this very hard to take seriously. As such, I essentially agree with the two others above that this should be closed as a procedural keep; it could even be argued that this falls under speedy keep criteria 1 or 3. Toadspike [Talk] 13:07, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Delete The article seems to be a pervasive work of WP:SYNTH that is syncretizing the views of several distinct people based on a tenuous connection to a position on Taiwan. Significant concern regarding accuracy of any citations in this. An article on this topic (albeit one with perhaps a less clumsy name) could definitely exist but I think this one needs WP:TNT. Simonm223 (talk) 15:12, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hm. A TNT may be appropriate here. There is a lot of unsourced and poorly-sourced content. But the article tries to discuss a notable topic (the distinction between "pro-Taiwan" and "pro-ROC") and I'm not sure if deletion is better than trying to clean it up. Toadspike [Talk] 08:18, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Clean-up would have to start with manually reviewing every citation to see if it actually supports what is claimed for it. It's not a small task. Simonm223 (talk) 11:57, 1 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/China&oldid=1293241110"