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.
I don't believe this individual meets WP:GNG since the existing sources don't meet the requirements on significant coverage, and I have not been able to find any other sources. He definitely doesn't meet WP:NPROF despite the praise heaped upon his accomplishments in the article - he is pretty much a run-of-the-mill economist, albeit apparently a talented one. The award mentioned in the first sentence of the article is not notable outside the immediate context of that university, as seen in this source. bonadeacontributionstalk 10:32, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The comment below was posted to the AfD talk page, so I copied it over. --bonadeacontributionstalk 19:21, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I am a Chinese reporter based in Ipoh. This man is quite a legend within Malaysians as he is young but manage to ease the property bubble aside to bring a khazanah grant recipient and also the royal education award. Khazanah is Malaysia's sovereign wealth fund and you had to be super genius to secure a research grant from them that is of national interest. Sometimes these type of intellectuals are hidden and it is good to put them out. I can assure you if not all, then most of the real estate industry and practitioners in malaysia know this man. Ask any Malaysians who is in the property Junthree (talk) 19:13, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sometimes these type of intellectuals are hidden Yes - that's why Wikipedia has special notability guidelines for academics, found here, and Tham Kuen Wei does not appear to meet any of those criteria. Any academic knows that getting a research grant is a big deal :-) however, it does not make a person encyclopedically notable. Unfortunately there is so much promotional hype in the article that it is difficult to see what the real claims to notability are - I can't see that there are any such claims at the moment. --bonadeacontributionstalk 19:26, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
But why would they make a reference to their ethnicity, of all things? I read the statement above as "even though I am a foreign citizen who is temporarily stationed in Malaysia I have heard of this person", which is not a valid argument for notability but would at least make sense. Maybe I misinterpreted it. -bonadeacontributionstalk 06:54, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My limited understanding is that ethnic identity in Malaysia is more delineated than in a lot of Western countries (eg: see Bumiputera (Malaysia), [1], [2] etc). Someone who describes themselves as Chinese could be a recent immigrant or could have ancesters who immigrated within the last few generations or could be someone with centuries of ancestry in the region. In this case, "Chinese reporter" is really a claim of some measure of experience/expertise in the domain of newsworthy Ipoh/MalaysianChinese people (it's not uncommon to see AFD comments where the poster states that they are from a particular location and/or work in a relevant field). ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 07:12, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I refer to the guidelines "However, academics, in the sense of the above definition, may also work outside academia (e.g., in industry, financial sector, government, as a clinical physician, as a practicing lawyer, etc.) and their primary job does not need to be academic in nature if they are known for their academic achievements. "
There is a link in the article itself that pointed out his research. https://thepropertytimes.my/2016/05/18/real-estate-expert-found-cause-of-malaysian-bubble-prompt-government-to-take-action/
There are more newspaper publications and papers including the ones attached earlier in the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Junthree (talk • contribs) 19:51, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This person may not be an Albert Einstein but he is well known in Malaysia within the real estate field, which helped to discover policies in reducing risks of non performing loans. I also found some details of the Royal Education Award "Significant development and contribution to country's progress and development", and i found some proof that he is indeed the recipient in more than 3 major news media including the News Straits Times Press and The Star, both major newspapers in Malaysia with over a million readers daily [1][2][3].
Nobody has disputed the fact that he received the award, but unless an award is itself notable according to Wikipedias definition of notability, it doesn't make the recipient notable. Of the four references you list here, the The Star reference above only mentions the person's name (not significant coverage), and the three others are already in the article so that doesn't change anything in the original deletion rationale. What is your own connection to Tham Kuen Wei? --bonadeacontributionstalk 09:01, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I had a look. The prize [3] is for really smart PHD graduates. The prize is not notable to Wikipedia at the moment, although a article could be created, it is a royal awards, and prize articles on Wikipedia are atrocious. There is some coverage for two things, one the prize and two the details discovering mechanisms in place of housing supply in Malaysia. The references are chronic, non-rs, press releases, dead refs and article itself is promotional. He is only 23, so not a noted economist at the moment. Very smart guy and working as a lecturer. Very early days, possibly WP:TOOSOON. scope_creepTalk 09:57, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26(spin me / revolutions) 17:18, 12 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A simple search shows he is notable. Deletion is not an option. Suggest more links to be updated in the article.WTFS8 (talk) 08:06, 13 April 2019 (UTC)— WTFS8 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Please provide some of the sources you found, since other editors have not been able to find significant independent coverage. Regards, --bonadeacontributionstalk 08:27, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I read through the entire discussion and the merits of the article should not be judged slowly on the award alone, but what policies he had introduced and changed in the malaysia real estate industry.
On one of the links by the property times - "The Malaysian government and Khazanah Nasional, sponsored Tham on a research to pursue indepth analysis into the matter. Tham suggested policies on rising of real property gain taxes to curb speculation, and lowering of the goods and services taxes to ease inflation and increase purchasing power to enhance loan repayments. According to a government spokesperson of the Central Bank, real property gain taxes are in the process of being revised. The goods and services taxes is currently being lobbied to be eradicated."https://thepropertytimes.my/2015/02/07/real-estate-economist-awarded-rare-fast-track-for-phd-by-university-of-malaya/
Not to mention the links attached by chessrepublic
[duplicate refs removed]
I think too much emphasis given on the award without considering the policies he changed for the Malaysian government. A keep article especially for Malaysian related topic.
(WTFS8 (talk) 10:54, 13 April 2019 (UTC))[reply]
Thank you. None of the new references you provided is a secondary source, they are letters to the editor written by the subject, plus a Linkedin link which is by definition useless for notability purposes. --bonadeacontributionstalk 11:51, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Nope you are wrong Bonadea. Look at the article of Focus Malaysia, it is published by independent media although its excerpt can be found on a linkedin page. Note to closing admin this article is created via Wikipedia Articles for Creation, which had gone through peer review before being published. A simple search in google shows he is famous but have to slowly go through all the search results for more information in the future. Junthree (talk) 08:22, 16 April 2019 (UTC) Duplicate "keep" struck --bonadeacontributionstalk 08:34, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Each user should only post one "keep/delete" comment. I struck the duplicate for you above. The Focus piece is not an "article", it is a letter to the editor/op-ed piece written by the subject, who then posted it on his LinkedIn page for promotion - that's fine, but he and his PR staff can't use Wikipedia like LinkedIn, the websites have different functions. Regardless of where it is published, that kind of text does not count towards notability, as already discussed above. Since no sources have as yet been found to show that he is notable, could you please provide some of the ones you have found? You have declared that you have a conflict of interest (which would have been obvious anyway from your editing behaviour) and so you are presumably in a position to know whether actual secondary sources exist, and where. So far we don't even have a souce to show when he received his PhD degree... --bonadeacontributionstalk 08:34, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 04:15, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Tham has four claims to notability: the award, his presidency of "the National Union of Real Estate (NURES)", work on the Malaysian real estate bubble, and his philanthropy:
NURES is the National Union of Real Estate Students
The award is evidence of student accomplishment, but is not notable as it was established in 1988, started at 14 awards annually in 1989, and had been awarded 567 times as of 2013 (when 38 were awarded).
His work on the property bubble has a limited source derived from an interview which states "Tham Kuen Wei warns of a potential property bubble in Malaysia, but the government must..." which is no evidence that his warning was correct or that it had any effect, or even that the peak of the property bubble was in 2015/2016.
His philanthropy is sourced to linkedin(!), and routine philanthropy, though generous, is not sufficient to buy notability.
CommentBut if you reread the article, "The Malaysian government and Khazanah Nasional, sponsored Tham on a research to pursue indepth analysis into the matter. Tham suggested policies on rising of real property gain taxes to curb speculation, and lowering of the goods and services taxes to ease inflation and increase purchasing power to enhance loan repayments." The government sponsors him for policy making. I think this deserves highlighting. [1] The coverage on his policy researching, discovering of new real estate issues and amount of coverage on welfare contributions fulfills notable guidelines. I did some extra search and there are also significant publications [2][3]WTFS8 (talk) 11:51, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
May i recommend a "keep for now" status. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WTFS8 (talk • contribs) 11:52, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No such thing as a "keep for now", I'm afraid - he is either notable or not. As observed above, it is quite possible that he will become notable in the future, in which case somebody who is not connected to him or his staff will probably create an article, but we don't keep articles on the off-chance that the subject will become notable in the future. And getting a government grant for research is a run-of-the-mill thing for an academic. It's a big deal for the individual involved, but it does not confer notability according to Wikipedia's definition. --bonadeacontributionstalk 15:30, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There are sources of notability for several reasons including 1) recipient of a national honors. You can argue that there had been many recipients since 1988. Well, one could also argue that there had been over 800 recipients of the Nobel Prize. I am not saying that the Royal Education Award is as notable as the Nobel, but the award itself deserves some reputation, as far as Malaysia is concern. That's why this topic is a Malaysian based article since the economist is famous in Malaysia. His name was honored in the first page of the University Gazette [4].
There is also extensive coverage on his reputation as a notable economist and real estate expert in Malaysia. Malaysian prominent real estate economist Tham Kuen Wei warns of a potential property bubble in Malaysia, but the government must take correct and prompt procedures to intervene while allow for market forces to coordinate supply and demand.he Malaysian government and Khazanah Nasional, sponsored Tham on a research to pursue indepth analysis into the matter. Tham suggested policies on rising of real property gain taxes to curb speculation, and lowering of the goods and services taxes to ease inflation and increase purchasing power to enhance loan repayments. According to a government spokesperson of the Central Bank, real property gain taxes are in the process of being revised. The goods and services taxes is currently being lobbied to be eradicated."
Another article "Also present in court was the council’s member Tham Kuen Wei who is also a key economist advisor and government sponsored researcher in Malaysia. The auctioneers filed their challenge in October, to revoke the registrar’s decision to implement the system. Tham, who is a licensed auctioneer and foreclosure consultant for over 7 years is also a Khazanah doctorate researcher who helps to look into policies and non-performing property loans in Malaysia. Tham had spoken against online system and advocated for a hybrid system instead as it will be more transparent. He had been on the consultative council of the Malaysian Council of Auctioneers (MPM) since 2018."
[5][6]
I found many coverage on him as a real estate expert including some mandarin related papers [7]Albertleeys (talk) 12:22, 23 April 2019 (UTC)— Albertleeys (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Receiving a prize that is not notable does not confer notability, it is as simple as that. There are hundreds of thousands of awards - literally - at various institutions of higher education around the world that are equally notable, which is to say, not at all as far as Wikipedia is concerned. Brief mentions of his name is not the same thing as significant coverage. Nothing in these sources adds anything to show notability - I have gone through the sources provided. --bonadeacontributionstalk 15:30, 25 April 2019 (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.