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. Consensus is to delete both articles Philg88 ^♦talk 06:20, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hu Ge (artist/director)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The page, as well as its history and the contributions of its main editor, scream of self-promotion (or hoax/fraud). While the page has 14 web references, References 1-5 and 12 do not seem to contain his name anywhere and References 6-11 and 13-14 are dead links. There are no other language versions of the page, I don't even know what the Chinese name of the person is. A search of "Hu Ge" + "WAZA" also didn't generate any meaningful result beyond Wikipedia, which makes me wonder whether this person actually exists. I am also nominating the following related pages because even though the art collective does seem to exist, it's not being mentioned in most references either:

Timmyshin (talk) 08:21, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No notability evidence found in google search, books etc. Perhabs notable for Chinese language Wikipedia but not here untill the artist becomes notable. --Wikishagnik (talk) 09:58, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While I don't deny that he is not notable, but if he is notable for Chinese Wikipedia he would be notable here too. There is no such thing as someone or something being notable in one language and not another. _dk (talk) 08:06, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, I did not mention he is notable in Chinese Wikipedia, just that he might be notable. Secondly and more importantly, without reliable (WP:RELIABLE) and verifiable (WP:VERIFY) sources the notability of this artist will always be open the challenge (WP:NOT). --Wikishagnik (talk) 10:08, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 02:54, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Ascii002Talk Contribs GuestBook 02:54, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:09, 7 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For Articles about living people it's very important that information in the article is verifiable. throwing some broken refs at the end of the article and some other refs with no explicit relationship to the content, means that nothing in the article is verifiable, also a condition for notability. - Metal lunchbox ^(talk) 00:22, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:08, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Those reference sites that loaded and were in English did not mention the subject at all.--Rpclod (talk) 03:49, 13 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete both Hu Ge (artist/director) and WAZA (art collective). No indication of notability. Could not find any RS that covers the Hu Ge or WAZA in any detail. -Zanhe (talk) 23:22, 13 September 2014 (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.