Qifang (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

nn long dead business --Altenmann >talk 05:53, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance and China. Shellwood (talk) 09:54, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Websites. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: The references seem to be adequate, and "long dead" is never a valid reason for deletion. Once notable, always notable. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 11:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I agree "long dead" is a non-starter argument. But are the references adequate?
  1- an interview with founder
  2- an interview with founder
  3- an article quoting the COO
  4- borderline promotional piece, maybe independent enough but not sure 21innovation.com is an RS
  5- company website

  Tried to do some searches but came up empty-handed other than this PR piece. Mostly because | this official dominates search results, along with other people having this as a name (e.g., this prof) Oblivy (talk) 13:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  TIL an article can stay tagged as a possible BLP violation on zhwiki for 13 years without action. Toadspike [Talk] 23:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  This is a fundamental weakness of the notability-tagging system, and could easily be true at enwiki. I contributed on an AfD where an IP with less than 20 edits drive-by tagged an article for notability then disappeared, and 13 years later an editor (who IMHO should have known better) nominated it with the rationale "tagged for notability since x". AfD closed as keep. FWIW that 齐放 article was created after press reported he was forced out of office over a personal scandal and the tag was applied the day after creation. Which, bringing it back to this AfD, suggests we aren't going to be creating any disambiguation pages for 齐放 anytime soon! Oblivy (talk) 00:50, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per analysis of Oblivy and per WP:NORG. No real WP:SIGCOV, Interviews and puff pieces dont count towards WP:SIGCOV. --hroest 13:54, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]