Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Geoffrey Wong

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. Notability not established. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 10:59, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Geoffrey Wong

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

Highly promotional article about a subject who does not meet WP:GNG. ubiquity (talk) 18:18, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. ubiquity (talk) 18:21, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. ubiquity (talk) 18:23, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I don't see anything that makes them particularly notable. -- Gestrid (talk) 18:32, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as nothing at all close to establish any form of actual notability. SwisterTwister talk 01:35, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a hedge fund manager who is no where near being notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:00, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

23 starting a hedge fund is not notable? I disagree — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.48.137.94 (talk) 09:26, 2 August 2016 (UTC) — 116.48.137.94 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Not unless other people say so. Unfortunately, the source for this is pay-walled, so I can't read it, but if Mr Wong is truly notable for that fact there should be more than one source to confirm it, and I cannot find any. The apparent general lack of reputable, independent sources covering Mr Wong is the reason we are having trouble with his notability. ubiquity (talk) 14:26, 2 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the hedge fund sources are pay-walled. Even if you check someone called Danny Yong, he is one of the best in Asia and only has 4 sources. If someone quite reputable within the space like hedge fund intelligence wrote about it, it means something. This industry is discreet and it's not as easy to find much sources on a manager than other industries. Such as Yong as an example — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben.poon123 (talk • contribs) 20:02, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Way WP:TOOSOON and doesn't pass GNG at the moment. As for Danny Yong, he has much more detailed and indepth sources over a period of time. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 05:34, 6 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Lemongirl1942. There's no indication of where he got his money to start, and what he's done with that capital. Also, hedge fund managers are quite common. Bearian (talk) 17:57, 8 August 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.