Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Yi-Jin

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 redirect to List of serving general and flag officers of the Singapore Armed Forces#Singapore Army. Between delete and redirect below, clear consensus not to retain the article, so going with the redirect option per ATD. Daniel (talk) 05:43, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Yi-Jin edit

[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)

May not pass WP:GNG. All sources are passing references of the subject, and not about the subject himself. Brigadier-General is the most junior general officer rank of the SAF, 2 ranks below the current highest rank available in the force, and though small in numbers, but there are many of them. Awards listed in the Education section are academic awards, which would have been awarded to any outstanding student in the college. Awards and decorations section: PAM, SAF Long Service awards are given if they are in a command position or in the force long enough. The rest are typical badges given for completing respective vocational courses. – robertsky (talk) 04:07, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 04:07, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 04:07, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. – robertsky (talk) 04:07, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 04:10, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment : Redirect to newly created list List of serving general and flag officers of the Singapore Armed Forces possible also. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:10, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep arguable whether he has SIGCOV in multiple RS, but as a General commanding a Division I think notability is satisfied. Mztourist (talk) 05:02, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Mztourist, one cannot presume notability just because one leads a division, especially for a country which does not see much of military activity despite its sizeable forces due to peacetime. Most of the divisions in Singapore are made up of reservists. Singaporean division commanders don't get mentioned in WP:RS most of the time about themselves unless they subsequently make a name in an unrelated industry/field. If it is just one division, and a redirect to the division page (if there is in the first place) should suffice. There is no further bio on his military career to substantiate the need of a separate article. – robertsky (talk) 06:48, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My !vote stands. regards Mztourist (talk) 10:04, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep Per Mztourist arguable whether he has SIGCOV in multiple RS but seems enough to qualify for GNG. Jaysonsands (talk) 10:37, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Looking at the references, primary source, standard reporting of board member changes, article is talking about the SAF task force and as the commander giving a routine interview, graduation report of what academic awards he achieved and a listing of award receipients. I do not see any SIGCOV about him. --Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 02:37, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Sourcing just about sufficient for WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:04, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator. Fails WP:SIGCOV as he is not the main subject of the sources.4meter4 (talk) 03:19, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO. Mcguy15 (talk, contribs) 14:18, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I read the policy wrong. I was just about to go full delete, but read #2 in Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Notability guide#Units and formations which says that commanders of divisions are inherently notable, per established policy. While I agree with the nom, I don't think you can selectively interpret the guideline by referencing the admittedly low level of action within the Singaporean military. Perhaps start a discussion on the policy talk page and use this as a test case, and then revisit. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:07, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Timtempleton: the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Notability guide#Units and formations is about the notability of the military unit/division, not commanders. Military BLPs are now subjected to WP:BIO since WP:NSOLDIER is deprecated. – robertsky (talk) 04:40, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Use of a project's notability standards which do not have community consensus behind them (are not a recognized WP:SNG) carry less weight when judging consensus. Relisting so those who advanced such an argument may instead use other guidelines/policies to support their position.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:43, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Tom Morris (talk) 10:21, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of serving general and flag officers of the Singapore Armed Forces#Singapore Army since he's listed there and his name is a plausible search term. Coverage in reliable sources appears to be merely passing and insufficient to support a standalone article, i.e. WP:GNG is not met. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 09:47, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to List of serving general and flag officers of the Singapore Armed Forces#Singapore Army per KN2731. --LordPeterII (talk) 15:55, 13 July 2021 (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.