Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zhao Jingyi

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 keep. Nicely improved. Mojo Hand (talk) 14:57, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Zhao Jingyi (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)

Stub article with practically no info or sources. Given that it says "there is no existing biography about this person" it's unlikely to ever see meaningful extension. Nothing links here either except for things like "List of people who died in 929". Hornpipe2 (talk) 20:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History, Military, and China. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:05, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Could be a footnote somewhere, not notable for our purposes if no other records exist. We can re-create if some archeological evidence surfaces to support his existence. Oaktree b (talk) 20:25, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I notified the article creator, Nlu (talk · contribs), about this nomination for deletion as Nlu had not been notified. Cunard (talk) 23:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Please see the article shumishi - a shumishi, pretty much by definition, is notable even if little else is known about him. --Nlu (talk) 05:21, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete this because, even if everything is true, holding that office does not pass WP:POLITICIAN. Even the title's article is poorly cited and might need to be deleted. Each of the articles is so poorly sourced as to lack significant coverage, thus failing general notability. An office holder might have been important, but without good sources, we can't be an encyclopedia. In 2007, the creator's argument might have been acceptable, but in 2022, it's untenable. Bearian (talk) 18:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Less Unless (talk) 14:45, 4 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. shumishi was pretty much a national title, which makes the subject pass WP:NPOL (first point). Sun8908 _Talk 18:43, 6 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Keep He was one of the highest court and military officials of the court of King Minggong. During the monarchy days, chiefs of staff (Shumishi) was a minister of the royal court. Moreover he had served several high-ranking positions such as Prefect of Ye, deputy military governor of Tianxiong, Privy envoy, the right guard general and chief of the army. Clearly passes WP:NPOL. Sources in historical books Tang Studies Volume 19, Chronology of the Five Dynasties and Early Song Dynasty: Five Dynasties and Early Song Dynasty, History of the New Five Dynasties. Taung Tan (talk) 10:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – seems to meet WP:NPOL as a national-level officeholder of the Later Tang. Thanks to User:Yinweiaiqing for expanding the article. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 08:36, 12 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the good work by Yinweiaiqing (talk · contribs) in expanding the article and per Taung Tan (talk · contribs)'s sources that verify that the subject meets WP:NPOL. Cunard (talk) 10:39, 12 June 2022 (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.