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. Sufficient sourcing appears to have been found. Sam Walton (talk) 21:24, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Justin Lee (criminal)[edit]

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

I frankly would've PROD but it may simply be driveby-removed, none of the sources here are both substantially convincing and significant, they are simply from that time for a large case about the rapes and the events from them; my searches are then simply finding exact news for this but only from those set times and events, nothing else to suggest there has been anything else convincing after the case was closed, and that's not surprising considering this has in fact not actually changed since then; note the article had to be changed because of apparent copyvios. I also was going to note that although the ChineseWiki has loads of information and sources, the basis seems to still be that what is here is all that exists, now that the case was closed, therefore there's nothing else to suggest otherwise better. SwisterTwister talk 19:31, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 19:33, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, move and repurpose as "Justin Lee sexual assault scandal" or similar, to conform with the equivalent article on Chinese Wikipedia. This is a case of WP:BLP1E where the 1E was highly notable, with the Chinese Wikipedia citing 25 news articles spanning over 3 years (definitely "persistent coverage"). Deryck C. 14:39, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Still, it is still in fact for only one event, the 3 years was because that's how long the case was, and that's common with all law cases. But there was still essentially nothing else after that, for then a convincing article after the fact, especially if once he was simply sentenced. SwisterTwister talk 14:57, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Taiwan-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:29, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:29, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete A disturbing crime, but Wikipedia is not news and nothing about the crime elevates it above that level.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:34, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTNEWS; this is routine police blotter. No lasting impact or significance. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:25, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not notable in the end; as noted Wikipedia is not a newspaper and as this was disturbing, unfortunately not uncommon type of behavior or events that occur in our world. Kierzek (talk) 13:04, 22 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Highly notable with long-lasting significance, #1) His dozens of sex/rape tapes can be found on every single porn site in any language with millions of hits even if his name isn't always associated with them (some of the western porn sites even identify him as Japanese or Korean). #2) Many of his victims/ONS partners are believed to be high-profile actresses/models, so even though their identities were never officially disclosed, some actresses still active on TV are widely believed to be "that girl in that video", which ensures continuous interest even if only privately. #3) His father was a director of a major financial company in Taiwan who had to resign because of this scandal, see his profile on Bloomberg. #4) Several China Times reporters/executives were indicted and sentenced for violating privacy while reporting this case, see [1]. I doubt the deletion proponents above performed WP:BEFORE in either English or Chinese. Timmyshin (talk) 11:52, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

....Having been listed at sex and porn websites is not convincing here for an article nor should it be, the concerns have stated that there still has essentially been nothing aside from this one event, and the claims of not having searched are entirely not so, because I searched as my analysis showed above and others have also noted their own concerns. Simply having been connected to supposed "high-profile celebrities" is not a claim at all for his own actual notability and as the comment above states itself: "they were believed to be" meaning it was all simply entertainment claims and nothing confirmed as facts (therefore any such claims like these are not linked to his own independent notability), and the same can be said about his father, who was never at all actually focused with this event itself, since it was his son who was involved with the legal and law cases, therefore the father's positions in all this is not at all actually convincing for the son's independent notability and article. Never once is this comment above either actually acknowledging the concerns listed, and instead is counteracting, stating that the commenters must not have searched or considered the article, when the consensus is showing there is still none of that of which is needed for his own substantial article, all this was for 1 event and nothing else happened after that 1 case. SwisterTwister talk 05:32, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:13, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Lots of Chinese sources (even the nom admits it has sufficient foreign language sourcing), we need someone who can speak the language, this is yet another case of western bias. This was a major scandal in Taiwan and has long lasting effects, we do not need english sources if foreign language ones exist, english is not a requirement. We really need a editor who speaks the language, not deletion. Just think, this crime happened in Taiwan yet the article is in 5 wiki languages, which proves sourcing exists. (P.S if the Chinese wikipedia has "loads of sources" then why can't you give the English wiki those too?)GuzzyG (talk) 21:10, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Google his mandarin name 李宗瑞 and look at all those sources, from Sep 2016 no less, shame i can't speak the language or i'd fix it myself. Serious western oversight going on here. GuzzyG (talk) 21:15, 2 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and rename It is true that this almost a BLP1E, but the event itself is highly significant. This is possibly the biggest sex scandal/drug rape case in recent years in Taiwan and it was all over Singaporean media (which is mostly English btw). One claim of significance is that it involved quite a few well known celebrities (who I am not naming per BLP concerns). The second was that there was a constant news coverage about this incident. You can see some English sources if you search "site:asiaone.com "Justin lee" Taiwan" - Some of them are here [2], [3], [4], [5]. There were some other effects as well for example the reporters who published the photos were queried and the issues as briefly referenced during the 2016 Taiwan election. This is definitely one of the more notable events in AfDs I have seen of late. A rename of the article (to avoid BLP concerns) is best here. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:43, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per WP:GNG. plenty of reliable and good sources as well.BabbaQ (talk) 13:33, 6 October 2016 (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.