469:. My connection to all these topics is that of a far-removed enthusiast. Interested in anything Asia-related, I began my profile editing the Royal Society of Arts page, then jumped into editing his mother's page, was surprised there wasn't an article about Smith on Knowledge, created it, and continued branching out to related content from there. I also specifically went through the
332:(where he is already mentioned) to the article of his mother. I reviewed a selection of the article's sources and found them to be unreliable sources or passing mentions. I was unable to find substantial coverage about Symington W. Smith in my searches for sources. Most of the sources I found briefly mentioned him in the context of his mother.
473:
process to make sure it was reviewed using Wiki's standards. I've seen Smith on
Chinese television, and my parents listen to his mother's music (I mentioned this during Afc), but my family and I have no relation to them whatsoever. I'm as close to the subject as the average Wikipedian is to the Queen
391:
from major, national-level news sources such as The People's Daily, Xinhua News, etc. which may be unfamiliar to many in the West. Based on sources such as the subject's coverage in King's
College London, their publications in independent journals and magazines with their own editorial boards such as
390:
can all be easily edited away and deleted as opposed to deleting the entire article. What fellow editors may perceive as apparent synthesis can also be edited away. I also suggest fellow multilingual editors search
Chinese-language sources on the subject using their Chinese name. There are many, and
380:
Nearly all issues raised can be fixed with deeper extensive editing. Deletion of the entire article is much too heavy-handed, and deletion should always be the last resort. Regarding notability, the article was reviewed multiple times and approved long ago by experienced editors when the article was
334:
I agree with the nominator's analysis that much of the article is synthesis and reads like a resume, so a merge (if one is done) should be very selective. I am also fine with a redirect without a merge but I support retaining the article's history as there are numerous sources in the article that
490:
by the
Chinese government as viable policy. (Not saying we should include or cite that anywhere since its original research, but I am saying the subject is clearly notable, especially in China and Asia.) Being on CCTV is like appearing on CNN in the U.S. or the BBC in Britain, and being cited by
502:
Western encyclopaedias like Wiki. On
Knowledge, I therefore aim to improve and include more Asian representation and Asia-related content through articles like this one while trying my best to adhere to our standards. Smith is far from the only subject I've covered in this area. See for example
706:
Let's try to avoid any ad-hominem attacks on the subject. I think constructive suggestions within the context of
Knowledge would be better. For example, we could say the conservative association newspaper is a weak source, support deletion, and leave it at that, without accusing the subject of
501:
is like having your work put front-and-center in the Daily
Telegraph, As someone who is of Chinese heritage myself, I'm used to the West being unaware of this, but its admittedly frustrating that subjects like Smith, who are well-known published experts in Asia are not included meaningfully in
728:
For the record, since I am arguing to keep the article, I think our strongest sources to support retention after robust editing are the following: One is from King's
College London , which goes into detail, two from the National Association of Asian-American Professionals ; and one from
688:) proudly boast of writing for a university conservative association newspaper (1828 journal). He is a master's student with a knack for self-promotion. I teach politics at a university and see this type of grift all the time. It is a remarkable stretch to call this person an "expert".
399:
their work being further translated and cited by major news outlets such as Xinhua (all available and cited in the article), I argue that the article should be kept even if its at a significantly reduced length after further editing which removes all contentious material.
506:, another China-related person, or my other edits on Asian professors and politicians. I can be a bit overzealous about topics I am passionate about (who isn't), so I definitely welcome editing and chopping the article down. Now you know what compels me. Haha!
385:
does not apply here, but I agree that GNG does. Again, even in terms of GNG, this was approved by other independent editors in AfC before. (The draft which was approved can be seen in the talk page of the article). Lacklustre citations about family members and
641:
I'm not quite sure how to best handle in the case where the discussion here ends in a redirect (as appears most likely), but I believe that the full page history will be preserved in that case. Perhaps the closing admin will be willing to give some advice.
441:
I'm curious to find out what compelled you to start this article and if you disclosed any conflicts, since it looks like you started your account editing in several topics intermingled with the subject before starting the
198:
563:
I am all for editing out excessive detail, disambiguating, and cutting out what could be perceived as promotional. We could even leave it as a stub if necessary, filling it in with more info as it becomes available.
250:
358:. I can't find any significant coverage in independent reliable sources. There is a lot of promotional content in the article and online, but none of it supports notability.
159:
192:
761:
270:
338:
I am willing to change my mind and support retention if any editor can list at least two reliable sources that provide substantial coverage of the subject.
106:
91:
627:. In this case, is there a way to perhaps move it back into draftspace again without deleting everything so the article can be worked on going forward?
589:
per suggestion of above editors. I don't see any evidence of GNG notability, and certainly there is no evidence of NPROF. Looks to me like a case of
541:, or it it "must" be kept, then this needs to be extensively edited of the promotional material and excessive detail, which is not usually allowed for
132:
127:
465:
Hi there! Happy to answer your question, please bear with me. Yes, I disclosed all conflicts (there are none) and this was all cleared during
136:
381:
first submitted in the
Articles for Creation, and conflict of interest was also cleared at the time. Subject is not really an academic, so
474:
of
England. For context, Smith and his family are basically household names in China. A quick look at Knowledge's counterpart in China,
119:
213:
335:
discuss the subject in passing that can be used to support adding a small amount of material about him to his mother's article.
233:
and GNG. There's a lot of original research (synthesis) and the article reads like a resume possibly written by a paid editor.
180:
86:
79:
17:
424:
367:
100:
96:
174:
293:
Many of the citations are about family members and do not establish independent notability. The article was highly
913:
40:
896:
879:
742:
716:
697:
668:
651:
636:
610:
573:
554:
515:
460:
429:
409:
372:
349:
319:
282:
262:
242:
61:
647:
606:
456:
278:
258:
238:
170:
693:
123:
833:
416:
359:
312:
530:
220:
909:
872:
730:
689:
115:
67:
36:
892:
762:"King's student recognised for his work on social change, youth empowerment and promoting East Asia"
656:
643:
620:
602:
452:
274:
254:
234:
206:
738:
712:
664:
632:
569:
538:
511:
492:
405:
382:
341:
302:
298:
230:
186:
624:
590:
550:
75:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
908:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
860:
503:
482:
times. Like many Chinese, I remember seeing his high school graduation getting broadcast on
345:
328:
57:
888:
598:
810:"Awards: NAAAP100, Inspire, Pride | National Association of Asian American Professionals"
785:
786:"Meet 2020 NAAAP Award honorees | National Association of Asian American Professionals"
542:
497:
734:
708:
660:
628:
594:
565:
534:
507:
470:
466:
401:
387:
294:
301:. Even if it were kept it would need to be heavily rewritten to meet MOS and NPOV.
546:
153:
475:
53:
415:
Pangaion is the article creator. The article was accepted by AfC in November.
809:
838:
Youth Service America | MLK Day of Service & Global Youth Service Day
597:, if you want to make a case for keeping this article, I suggest reading
887:- I did a quick search and can't see any way that this can pass WP:GNG.
52:. Redirect can be created as an editorial decision if so desired.
685:
623:! I took a look and actually agree that it seems like a case of
904:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
486:, his many appearances on CCTV, and recently his work being
478:, where he also has an article, shows it's been viewed over
251:
list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions
449:
447:
445:
443:
149:
145:
141:
205:
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
916:). No further edits should be made to this page.
451:What is your connection to all of these topics?
269:Note: This discussion has been included in the
249:Note: This discussion has been included in the
219:
8:
107:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
271:list of China-related deletion discussions
268:
248:
707:'grift' or attacking their credentials.
834:"Everyday Young Hero - Symington Smith"
753:
7:
684:His Knowledge page and his website (
24:
543:a person with marginal notability
327:Very selective merge/redirect to
297:reliant before these were marked
601:and following the advice there.
92:Introduction to deletion process
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
686:https://www.symingtonsmith.com
659:: Summon the ancient council!
329:Wei Wei (singer)#Personal life
1:
897:15:17, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
880:13:00, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
743:04:26, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
717:04:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
698:14:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
669:04:07, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
652:09:24, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
637:07:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
611:07:26, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
574:03:30, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
555:21:14, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
516:03:30, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
461:22:35, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
430:14:13, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
410:03:35, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
373:21:46, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
350:11:43, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
320:23:40, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
283:23:25, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
263:23:25, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
243:23:25, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
62:00:11, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
82:(AfD)? Read these primers!
933:
229:Notability unclear under
906:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
731:Youth Service America
480:five hundred thousand
393:The National Interest
80:Articles for deletion
484:national television
733:, available here.
537:, as suggested by
116:Symington W. Smith
68:Symington W. Smith
432:
285:
265:
97:Guide to deletion
87:How to contribute
924:
877:
870:
865:
848:
847:
845:
844:
830:
824:
823:
821:
820:
806:
800:
799:
797:
796:
782:
776:
775:
773:
772:
758:
504:William Lindesay
427:
423:
419:
414:
397:Modern Diplomacy
370:
366:
362:
315:
308:
224:
223:
209:
157:
139:
77:
34:
932:
931:
927:
926:
925:
923:
922:
921:
920:
914:deletion review
873:
866:
861:
853:
852:
851:
842:
840:
832:
831:
827:
818:
816:
808:
807:
803:
794:
792:
784:
783:
779:
770:
768:
760:
759:
755:
531:WP:NOTINHERITED
425:
421:
417:
368:
364:
360:
318:
313:
303:
166:
130:
114:
111:
74:
71:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
930:
928:
919:
918:
900:
899:
882:
850:
849:
825:
801:
777:
752:
751:
747:
746:
745:
722:
721:
720:
719:
701:
700:
678:
677:
676:
675:
674:
673:
672:
671:
657:Russ Woodroofe
644:Russ Woodroofe
621:Russ Woodroofe
614:
613:
603:Russ Woodroofe
579:
578:
577:
576:
558:
557:
523:
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
498:Reference News
453:Morbidthoughts
436:
435:
434:
433:
375:
353:
323:
322:
310:
287:
286:
275:Morbidthoughts
266:
255:Morbidthoughts
235:Morbidthoughts
227:
226:
163:
110:
109:
104:
94:
89:
72:
70:
65:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
929:
917:
915:
911:
907:
902:
901:
898:
894:
890:
886:
883:
881:
878:
876:
871:
869:
864:
858:
855:
854:
839:
835:
829:
826:
815:
814:www.naaap.org
811:
805:
802:
791:
790:www.naaap.org
787:
781:
778:
767:
766:www.kcl.ac.uk
763:
757:
754:
750:
744:
740:
736:
732:
727:
724:
723:
718:
714:
710:
705:
704:
703:
702:
699:
695:
691:
690:Metalman andy
687:
683:
680:
679:
670:
666:
662:
658:
655:
654:
653:
649:
645:
640:
639:
638:
634:
630:
626:
622:
618:
617:
616:
615:
612:
608:
604:
600:
596:
592:
588:
584:
581:
580:
575:
571:
567:
562:
561:
560:
559:
556:
552:
548:
544:
540:
536:
532:
528:
525:
524:
517:
513:
509:
505:
500:
499:
494:
489:
485:
481:
477:
472:
468:
464:
463:
462:
458:
454:
450:
448:
446:
444:
440:
439:
438:
437:
431:
428:
420:
413:
412:
411:
407:
403:
398:
394:
389:
384:
379:
376:
374:
371:
363:
357:
354:
352:
351:
347:
343:
339:
336:
331:
330:
325:
324:
321:
317:
316:
309:
307:
300:
296:
292:
289:
288:
284:
280:
276:
272:
267:
264:
260:
256:
252:
247:
246:
245:
244:
240:
236:
232:
222:
218:
215:
212:
208:
204:
200:
197:
194:
191:
188:
185:
182:
179:
176:
172:
169:
168:Find sources:
164:
161:
155:
151:
147:
143:
138:
134:
129:
125:
121:
117:
113:
112:
108:
105:
102:
98:
95:
93:
90:
88:
85:
84:
83:
81:
76:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
905:
903:
884:
874:
867:
862:
856:
841:. Retrieved
837:
828:
817:. Retrieved
813:
804:
793:. Retrieved
789:
780:
769:. Retrieved
765:
756:
748:
725:
681:
586:
582:
526:
496:
487:
483:
479:
396:
392:
377:
355:
340:
337:
333:
326:
314:Need a word?
311:
305:
290:
228:
216:
210:
202:
195:
189:
183:
177:
167:
73:
49:
47:
31:
28:
476:Baidu Baike
383:WP:ACADEMIC
231:WP:ACADEMIC
193:free images
889:VocalIndia
859:per nom --
843:2021-02-07
819:2021-02-07
795:2021-02-07
771:2021-02-07
749:References
625:WP:TOOSOON
591:WP:TOOSOON
910:talk page
37:talk page
912:or in a
735:Pangaion
709:Pangaion
661:Pangaion
629:Pangaion
599:WP:THREE
595:Pangaion
587:redirect
566:Pangaion
508:Pangaion
402:Pangaion
160:View log
101:glossary
39:or in a
726:Comment
547:Bearian
426:Windows
369:Windows
304:Shadows
199:WP refs
187:scholar
133:protect
128:history
78:New to
885:Delete
875:(talk)
863:Devoke
857:Delete
682:Delete
583:Delete
539:Cunard
535:WP:GNG
493:Xinhua
471:WP:AfC
467:WP:AfC
418:Fences
388:WP:SPS
361:Fences
356:Delete
342:Cunard
306:settle
295:WP:SPS
291:Delete
171:Google
137:delete
54:Daniel
50:delete
868:water
585:, or
527:Merge
488:cited
422:&
365:&
214:JSTOR
175:books
154:views
146:watch
142:links
16:<
893:talk
739:talk
713:talk
694:talk
665:talk
648:talk
633:talk
607:talk
570:talk
551:talk
533:and
529:per
512:talk
495:and
457:talk
442:AfC.
406:talk
395:and
378:Keep
346:talk
279:talk
259:talk
239:talk
207:FENS
181:news
150:logs
124:talk
120:edit
58:talk
619:Hi
593:.
221:TWL
158:– (
895:)
836:.
812:.
788:.
764:.
741:)
715:)
696:)
667:)
650:)
635:)
609:)
572:)
553:)
545:.
514:)
459:)
408:)
348:)
299:cn
281:)
273:.
261:)
253:.
241:)
201:)
152:|
148:|
144:|
140:|
135:|
131:|
126:|
122:|
60:)
891:(
846:.
822:.
798:.
774:.
737:(
711:(
692:(
663:(
646:(
631:(
605:(
568:(
549:(
510:(
455:(
404:(
344:(
277:(
257:(
237:(
225:)
217:·
211:·
203:·
196:·
190:·
184:·
178:·
173:(
165:(
162:)
156:)
118:(
103:)
99:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.