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 delete. Sandstein 09:01, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vietnamese heiresses with coronavirus[edit]

Vietnamese heiresses with coronavirus (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)

These individuals appear to have been mentioned in the press due to a single event and otherwise do not meet WP:NBIO. The present world pandemic is likely to result in much higher profile victims being affected, and this will be mentioned, if relevant, on their article pages, not in specially written articles like this one. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 09:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:06, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• delete per nomination or merge with 2020 coronavirus pandemic in Vietnam. Im cool with either one. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:55, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Bondegezou (talk) 11:36, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per Cwmhiraeth. The precedent with notable individuals who are sick with coronavirus is to note the fact on their bio page, not create separate articles. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 15:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The people here are not "notable individuals". Their father owns a factory and they had an instagram page. Not every daughter of a factory owner who posts on Instagram is notable. If we set that as a mark of notability, than we would double the size of Wikipedia and half of the articles would be on people who the most notable thing they did was post of instagram. It does not appear that their father is notable, they are even less so since notability is not inherited. Keeping this page would create a huge number of really, really, really bad precedents.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. As far as I can tell, we don't even have articles about these two women in Wikipedia, so I don't know why we would want to have a separate article about their illness. As intensely as I expect Wikipedia to cover COVID-19, we don't need separate articles to cover the pandemic at the individual patient level. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:SALAT. Way too specific to be acceptable. Clarityfiend (talk) 18:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Far too detailed. Bearian (talk) 01:11, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Per lack of notability. I am leaning to speedy due to BLP. Agathoclea (talk) 08:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I don't believe the people mentioned on here meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 18:15, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I think it's not notable for an article. Thingofme (talk) 00:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:1E. These heiresses would not be notable if not for the current COVID-19 pandemic.  Bait30  ^{Talk 2 me pls?} 04:21, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails WP:GNG imo. It has not complied with the policies and guidelines. Abishe (talk) 15:19, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete The individuals may or may not be notable - that's irrelevant. The subject area is, itself, not a noteworthy topic. If it were, we might as well have a page on one-legged lesbian redheads from Vietnam with coronavirus. And it should anyway then be a List article of solely notable Vietnamese one-legged lesbian redheads or, as here, Vietnamese hieresses. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I tried to find that article, but it apparently hasn't been started. Perhaps it would be more enticing if it had the word "hot" in it. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 18:25, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:GNG and probably also WP:INDISCRIMINATE. If the only reason these heiresses have articles is because they have the virus, they maybe shouldn't have articles. Plus, this doesn't really explain what a heiress is. epicgenius (talk) 17:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 11:51, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 11:51, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete WP:SNOW too specific and and not notable. WP:NLIST Lightburst (talk) 16:20, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete This is an article that is too specific and is by its definition not notable. Nothing to see here. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Super Strong Delete also known as Speedy Delete and possibly Close nomination per everyone voted delete. 2001:569:74D2:A800:9514:1D74:AEDD:C8B7 (talk) 22:18, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete This reads like a tabloid page not an encyclopedia article. It also at some level reads like a class war mongering, populist screed to develop an attempt to blame COVID19 in Vietnam on the factory owner class. It is a horrible violation of BLP policies among other things. This breathless attack page should not be merged with the larger article on COVID-19 in Vietnam.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:14, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete This sounds like a gossip magazine information. All of these information can still be written inside the main COVID-19 page of Vietnam and should not be written too detailed. Chongkian (talk) 03:26, 22 March 2020 (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.