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. Fram (talk) 09:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fa Pao[edit]

Non-notable tower; the festival it's used in is red linked so I doubt its notability. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 20:31, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 23:04, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

References added. Please read the Tin Hau Festival and Fa Pau is shown in this page should one not know about the heritage over hundreds of years. — HenryLi (Talk) 23:40, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. One sentence does not a wikipedia article make. B.Wind (talk) 05:37, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If you see one-sentence articles as a problem then the solution is to add more sentences. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:33, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for the short page. Please note that WP:1S is not a policy but some contributors' opinion only. On the contrary, the article does not fall into any deletion category in WP:DEL after the improvement. It takes time to improve and need help from experts in the religion, culture or anthropology of South China. — HenryLi (Talk) 04:32, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 17:13, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The references might be better suited for an article on the festival. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 17:42, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete: I agree with TPH that if this tower is a part of the festival, an article on the festival is more appropriate ... provided it is a proper article with suitable verification and establishment of notability. Given that this article is two years old, it's already had plenty of time to establish that. WP:HEY applies, but I'd need some convincing to change my vote. RGTraynor 20:16, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As there are no reliable sources cited, I am persuaded that the article does not comply with the verifiability policy. Stifle (talk) 18:39, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - use the small amount of content here to build a decent article about the festival itself (I'd love to see such a page). HenryLi - the WP:DEL category that this falls into is "fails to meet the relevant notability guideline". Merenta (talk) 19:17, 17 May 2008 (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.