Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ng Kwok Chun

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. Daniel (talk) 19:08, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ng Kwok Chun

[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)

I can't find anything notable about this person outside their arrest and execution. Seems to be a case of WP:BIO1E, and WP:PERP also applies. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:13, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Routine drug arrest and execution it seems, nothing much to differentiate it from other cases. The pair don't seem notable otherwise and I can't find much about their lives outside of this series of events. Oaktree b (talk) 15:14, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Due to when the crime was done, they might have coverage in paper-only sources though. Oaktree b (talk) 15:15, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Crime, Hong Kong, and Singapore. Shellwood (talk) 15:19, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment potentially there's an issue of jurisdiction here but the article doesn't frame it that way and instead it seems to be a fairly routine police-blotter account. Closer can count this as a delete vote if nobody else is saying otherwise. Elinruby (talk) 20:45, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. A Google search on the subject reveals that the subject's legal proceedings (PP v Ng Kwok Chun) have been cited in a number of academic legal articles and judicial precedent, thereby satisfying notability criteria. Dawkin Verbier (talk) 13:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That does not make the individual notable. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:04, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nonetheless, I don't think deleting the article would be the best thing to do. I would suggest instead to rename to PP v Ng Kwok Chun. Dawkin Verbier (talk) 06:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, There might be paper sources for this, but it would take a long time to find them. Searching on google has no reliable sources.`~HelpingWorld~`^(👽🛸) 04:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep hi all, i created this article and others of a similar style to provided info on foreign drug mules who were caught moving drugs via Singapore's changi airport, info is impossible to find online so i had to dig into archived newspapers (i have provided links throughout). i wanted to record the circumstances of their arrest and their attempts to present legal arguments to get off the charge, which always failed ... if others think its not Notable there isnt much i can say in reply as that is their opinion, howevere i will point out there are countless other articles that could be considered not notable, such as Duncan McKenzie (murderer), that have been on wikipedia for many years without any issues at all — Preceding unsigned comment added by WorldTravleerAndPhotoTaker (talk • contribs) 08:30, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS isn't a reason for keeping. LibStar (talk) 02:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:PERP. LibStar (talk) 02:17, 25 January 2023 (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.