Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Erin Zhu

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 of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 00:10, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

134 Google hits, her only claim to notability is being the wife of a German musician, being involved in some personal and legal spat and making some unsubstantiated allegations. Oh, and she's used Usenet. Wow, I've used Usenet. That mean I get an article too? Unencyclopedic. FCYTravis 01:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - Interestingly, my name gets 1,140 Google hits. So if we keep this lady, can I start an article on myself? FCYTravis 01:47, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Sure! It's surprising there are so many USENET bio articles to begin with. karmafist 02:45, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete nn--MONGO 06:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Keep notable figure, married to Blixa Bargeld and central to the WebEx/Min Zhu controversy. Nomination appears motivated out of spite. FeloniousMonk 06:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - The "WebEx/Min Zhu" controversy is a non-notable tempest in a teapot. FCYTravis 08:01, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • The CEO of a publically-traded company being accused of child molestation by his own daughter is a matter public concern that extends far beyond that of the narrow concerns of the company's shareholders and potential investors. Considering that Min Zhu is a Chinese national who has now fled back to China and that WebEx has a large Department of Defense contract to carry classified data accross its network which has servers in China, and it's hardly a tempest in a teapot. You need to read up on this, clearly. FeloniousMonk 08:31, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Clearly this is a major story worldwide, given that there are no news stories or Google hits for this outside User:Larvatus' LiveJournal. You appear to be using Wikipedia as a soapbox, something it is not. FCYTravis 08:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
        • Careful with your allegations. WP:AGF Everything I stated is easily verified with Google, which seems to be the extent to which you're willing to confirm facts. FeloniousMonk 08:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
          • One person's LiveJournal and some Usenet posts =! verifiable sources. FCYTravis 08:58, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
            • And the sworn testimony found in the court transcripts you can't be bothered with: [1]. FeloniousMonk 09:03, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
              • Sworn testimony in a civil case =! criminal allegation. FCYTravis 09:06, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
                • The distinction is irrelevant. The fact that it is sworn testimony made in a court is sufficient to establish that the allegation was made by Erin, which is the only issue here. The article doesn't claim the allegation is true, only that it is made. The fact that it is made and is verifiable is sufficient grounds for reporting it in Wikipedia, as it is notable and highly relevant to the subject. FeloniousMonk 09:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
                  • Felonious, I tried to verify those reports. I couldn't. The cited court reports all refer to a commercial dispute between the author, Zelney, and Webex. Where is there a neutral source for allegations of abuse made in open court? - Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 22:51, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to WebEx. That article already contains all encyclopedia-worthy information on this person. Flyboy Will 09:27, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and redirect to WebEx per above. --Pierremenard
• Delete without redirect: Erin Zhu's connection with WebEx is unencyclopedic. - squibix 15:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per squibix. rodii 20:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. not notable. Agnte 20:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete --NaconKantari 20:24, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Gamaliel 02:18, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Get rid of this cruft. karmafist 02:44, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete POV article on non-notable (i.e. unverifiable from neutral secondary sources) relative of barely-known corporate executive, apparently created to further a vendetta by User:Larvatus Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] AfD? 22:49, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete non-notable person, and probably an example of WP:POINT. Stifle 13:04, 26 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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.