Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wanbang gardens

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 no consensus to delete, default to keep. Despite Wikipediatrix's assertion to the contrary, sources in languages other than English are allowed under WP:V. Sandstein 12:03, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wanbang gardens

Wanbang gardens (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

One of many apartment buildings in China. 650l2520 00:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete - Nothing on G-news, G-hits are Wikipedia and mirrors, no assertion of notability at all. Giggy UCP 00:44, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete I dont think english sites would be the best place to look for sources, but its not notable unless proven otherwise. Corpx 03:53, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep Chinese name is 万邦花园, which gets about 1200 GHits [1]; been in the news in the past when owners there got 14 million RMB compensation in a dispute over ownership certificates in which they filed hundreds of lawsuits [2]. cab 04:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletions. cab 04:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete not notable. Harlowraman 05:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Definitely a non-notable apartment. Keb25 11:53, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep there are multiple articles about lawsuits, even one in English [3], and they were featured in Chinese and Overseas Architecture [4]. Kappa 06:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
    • And looks like they have "Some new practices in indoor water system design for residential buildings" [5] Kappa 06:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, appears to be notable with plenty of sources. Just because they aren't in English isn't a reason to delete. --Belovedfreak 14:55, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
Well, actually, it is, because this is the English-speaking Wikipedia. The average English-speaking reader of Wikipedia has no way of verifying the content or the veracity of these sources for themselves. There is a Chinese Wikipedia here. wikipediatrix 20:05, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
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.