Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Li-Meng Yan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Herobrine (talk | contribs) at 08:08, 13 July 2020 (Li-Meng Yan). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

AfDs for this article:
Li-Meng Yan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is the product of a one off news story which has been ignored by mainstream credible journalism, and only cited by non-reputable right wing and conspiracy based news sources. Her testimony as a so called whistleblower has very serious, gaping credibility problems including an outright denial from the University she was working for (which is not based in Wuhan or mainland China) that she ever undertaken such research on "human to human transmission", and dubious claims about being a so called defector. The latter is why verifiable, mainstream media sources have ignored it. There is no proof she has any ties to the Chinese government or has any kind of insider information. As a result, I am nominating this page for deletion on the dual grounds of notability and reputability Antonian Sapphire (talk) 10:52, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 11:15, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 11:15, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


i feel like overwhelming public interest should allow it to stay up; however wikipedia should point out she carries no evidence. also, the above poster says that "verifiable, mainstream media sources have ignored it", which is not true. fox news has covered it, and while the network leans right, it is a serious media organization that doesn't purposefully publish fake news. Matayo41 (talk) 10:52, 12 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matayo41 (talkcontribs) 14:49, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep may I remind you that Wikipedia has deemed Fox News (website) a reliable source (WP:FOXNEWS) and so the subject meets WP:GNG. Of course the target of her exposé would deny her claims, that's to be expected. It's not up to Wikipedia to decide whether her claim is factual or not -- we only ought to verify what can be verified outright, including her background and the fact that her story was picked up not only by Fox News but multiple other news sources. --MewMeowth (talk) 20:55, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong University is not in Mainland China, is a reputable, independent university and is not under political control (yet). Given that the same University had a very active role in determining the course and scale of the original pandemic far beyond the mainland's wishes indicates this is not the type of institution that would pursue a cover-up. The creation of this story is also linked to Steve Bannon, who is known for being a perpetrator of fake and misleading news.-Antonian Sapphire (talk) 21:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
If one reads the Mail on Sunday account of her story, she offers no direct evidence to her claims whatsoever. It's all hearsay and speculation. She's not a whistleblower, she doesn't know anything Antonian Sapphire (talk) 21:12, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Do not delete. Let her talk, she can have her page and all her claims can be called out to what it is just claims till she is able to showcase herself. Till then deleting won’t do anything except to silence a potential whistlblower (if the information she shares turns out to be true). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.169.166.237 (talk) 01:39, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this article should be deleted as mentioned by users above, this article and the person mentioned produces no evidence, no major news organization then Fox News have reported on this issue, as such, as this page relates to current and conflicting information, it should be deleted. Jdmdk (talk) 02:26, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Kj cheetham (talk) 07:25, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:32, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. She doesn't have a google-scholar profile which makes calculating the h-index more difficult, but it appears to me to be above 20, so she is not an insignificant researcher. Furthermore, her escape from China has been covered by the international press, not just Fox News, I see Indian, British, American, Hong Kong, Portuguese, and others all covering this.--Eostrix  (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 07:41, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep same answer as MewMeowth. --Herobrine303 (talk) 08:08, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]