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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:32, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chan Hon Goh[edit]

Chan Hon Goh (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)

This article may contain unreferenced sources and many peacock terms which promote a subject. Vitaium (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Vitaium (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Vitaium (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Vitaium (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Dance-related deletion discussions. Vitaium (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Vitaium (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Vitaium (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Oh, come on. Goh is a retired prima ballerina who passes WP:ANYBIO several times over. She's not in the DCB but she is in The Canadian Encyclopedia, which is referenced several times in this article. She has an Order of Canada. She was the first Chinese principal dancer in the National Ballet of Canada. She might even pass WP:NAUTHOR. -- asilvering (talk) 02:46, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Goh is a well-known figure in ballet, as a former principal dancer of National Ballet of Canada, meaning one of the highest ranking dancers in the largest ballet company in Canada, and the fact that she’s the first Chinese dancer to do so make her even more notable. But I agree that the article is in poor shape and I’m willing to work on it at some point in the future. Corachow (talk) 02:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment May be notable, but this version is tagged as a copyvio. Needs to be rewritten. Oaktree b (talk) 03:46, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Most of its high rating is because of the list of awards. Otherwise, four sentences are affected: [1]. -- asilvering (talk) 03:49, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the article contains too much content that is both promotional and unsourced. A WP:TNT deletion is needed. The revision history shows this was mostly a resume for over a decade, before being rewritten from scratch by an IP yesterday. I don't see either version being worth keeping. User:力 (powera, π, ν) 03:50, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• KEEP clearly notable as a former principal dancer of National Ballet of Canada. There are problems with the article. The problems do not mean the article subject is not notable.VocalIndia (talk) 05:14, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment I'm not sure which way to !vote. The subject is clearly notable, but WP:TNT might be needed, on the other hand, WP:DINC... I'm leaning towards keep though. Might need stubifying (is that a word?) -Kj cheetham (talk) 09:46, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The article is fixable. -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:06, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The subject is in two reference books (Cengage Contemporary Authors & Canadian Encyclopedia), which both also have bibliographies to other sources so meets WP:BASIC. I cleaned up the article a bit to remove some of the promotional & copyrighted content. Jumpytoo Talk 21:58, 27 January 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.