Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wisepowder

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:55, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wisepowder

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The "Hong Kong Satellite Television" links read like press releases, not independent reporting. The scholarship articles are not independent, and they seem to have received no significant attention. Looking for further sources proved fruitless for me. Fram (talk) 08:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 08:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 08:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 08:21, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Matthew hk (talk) 13:03, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Also it had no relation to HK but China.

The wiki creator ThoughtEngrossed (see Special:Permalink/935710884) use lots of online articles with wrong |publisher= and |work= values (filled a name of TV Channel operator, but is not the valid value for "work"), faking as the publication from more famous media.

sxhkstv.com is not the website for "Hong Kong Satellite Television" (and the audience of that TV station was in fact Mainland Chinese). The website is for a company 阳泉市香江紫荆影视传媒有限公司 instead .
Another web article used in the wiki article, is re-published at southcn.com, probably copied from "北国网" according to attribution, but i can't located the original article at 北国网 (lnd.com.cn). southcn.com is the official site of Nanfang Daily , but also acted as news portal website and re-publisher (Chinese news portal notoriously copy and paste content from other site). The e-paper of the newspaper is located at epaper.southcn.com and everything else apart from that subdomain had a heavy discount as a RS. While 北国网 belongs to the publisher of Liaoning Daily, but it had the same status of southcn.com: the site also act as re-publisher. epapers of Liaoning Daily Newspaper Group including Liaoning Daily are located in epaper.lnd.com.cn instead. So, it may has a scene that the article re-published two times and the second copy and paste had the wrong attribution. But the trace of the original publisher of that article vanished at the stop lnd.com.cn anyway.

Yet another citation, is from ChicagoNow, which is a blogger hosting website. Self-publishing source is not a reliable source and it only had routine mention of the company.

After chopping them, no reliable source to indicate notability and even with WP:Before steps, no articles seem passing WP:GNG and WP:NCORP. Matthew hk (talk) 13:35, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no indication of notability. -Zanhe (talk) 00:23, 17 January 2020 (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.