TheSoundAndTheFury (talk | contribs) ~~~~ |
Ohconfucius (talk | contribs) →Bo Guagua: Delete |
||
Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
*'''Comment''' : the essential criteria to establish the notability of a person, per [[WP:BIO]], is is that "he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Bo Guagua is the primary subject of numerous feature and investigative articles, published in venues like the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Foreign Policy, the Daily Telegraph, etc. Several articles predated the recent scandal around his father (more of this nature could be found). The other relevant issue from [[WP:BIO]] is this caveat: "That person A has a relationship with well-known person B, such as being a spouse or child, is not a reason for a standalone article on A (unless significant coverage can be found on A)." Significant coverage can be found on Guagua—not for what his father has done, but for his own actions. This is my reading of the policy, at least. [[User:Homunculus|Homunculus]] ([[User talk:Homunculus|duihua]]) 14:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Comment''' : the essential criteria to establish the notability of a person, per [[WP:BIO]], is is that "he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Bo Guagua is the primary subject of numerous feature and investigative articles, published in venues like the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Foreign Policy, the Daily Telegraph, etc. Several articles predated the recent scandal around his father (more of this nature could be found). The other relevant issue from [[WP:BIO]] is this caveat: "That person A has a relationship with well-known person B, such as being a spouse or child, is not a reason for a standalone article on A (unless significant coverage can be found on A)." Significant coverage can be found on Guagua—not for what his father has done, but for his own actions. This is my reading of the policy, at least. [[User:Homunculus|Homunculus]] ([[User talk:Homunculus|duihua]]) 14:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''' seems to clearly pass notability. Not a comment on the edifyingness of topic. [[User:TheSoundAndTheFury|The Sound and the Fury]] ([[User talk:TheSoundAndTheFury|talk]]) 14:59, 26 April 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' seems to clearly pass notability. Not a comment on the edifyingness of topic. [[User:TheSoundAndTheFury|The Sound and the Fury]] ([[User talk:TheSoundAndTheFury|talk]]) 14:59, 26 April 2012 (UTC) |
||
* '''Delete''' Notability is not inherited. The interest in the subject is [[WP:BLP1E|solely the result]] of interest in his parents. Assertions as to the significance of the subject, and the sources supposedly evidencing this, are about princelings in general, and as such Bo Guagua enjoys mentions which could be considered 'trivial'.<p>The article is more impotently a large possible [[WP:BLP]] violation, and may violate [[WP:ATTACK]]: the material contained herein, even where sourced, is heavily reliant on gossip and speculation, and all that isn;t isn't of biographical merit; most of it is negative, has been denied. <small>[[User:Ohconfucius|<span style="color:Black;font:bold 8pt 'kristen itc';text-shadow:cyan 0.3em 0.3em 0.1em;">Ohconfucius</span>]] [[User talk:Ohconfucius|<sup>¡digame!</sup>]]</small> 15:30, 26 April 2012 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:30, 26 April 2012
Bo Guagua
- Bo Guagua (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I know this one is going to be controversial, but...
This person's only significance is that his father is embroiled in a scandal. All of the stories about him are in the context of his father, and the sources reflect on this. Notability is not inherited. The parts that deal with Bo Xilai should be merged into that article, since Bo Guagua's lifestyle is part of Bo Xilai's not Bo Guagua's scandal. The rest should be deleted. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:31, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Comment : the essential criteria to establish the notability of a person, per WP:BIO, is is that "he or she has been the subject of multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Bo Guagua is the primary subject of numerous feature and investigative articles, published in venues like the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Foreign Policy, the Daily Telegraph, etc. Several articles predated the recent scandal around his father (more of this nature could be found). The other relevant issue from WP:BIO is this caveat: "That person A has a relationship with well-known person B, such as being a spouse or child, is not a reason for a standalone article on A (unless significant coverage can be found on A)." Significant coverage can be found on Guagua—not for what his father has done, but for his own actions. This is my reading of the policy, at least. Homunculus (duihua) 14:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Keep seems to clearly pass notability. Not a comment on the edifyingness of topic. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 14:59, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Notability is not inherited. The interest in the subject is solely the result of interest in his parents. Assertions as to the significance of the subject, and the sources supposedly evidencing this, are about princelings in general, and as such Bo Guagua enjoys mentions which could be considered 'trivial'.
The article is more impotently a large possible WP:BLP violation, and may violate WP:ATTACK: the material contained herein, even where sourced, is heavily reliant on gossip and speculation, and all that isn;t isn't of biographical merit; most of it is negative, has been denied. Ohconfucius ¡digame! 15:30, 26 April 2012 (UTC)