Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerrit W. Gong

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|Gerrit W. Gong}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gerrit_W._Gong Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Gerrit W. Gong}})

Qualifies for deletion per WP:BLP1E. The only significant coverage about the subject is about him becoming the first Chinese-American apostle of the LDS church. Other coverage in independent, reliable sources is limited to minor pasing mentions within the context of routine event coverage and plain name checks, none of which establish notability per Wikipedia's standards of notability. Also the article is heavily dependent upon primary sources, which are not usable to establish notability. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:24, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:24, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

:Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:25, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

• Keep Every single member of the Quorum of the 12 apostles has an article. There is continuing and widespread coverage. I will demonstrate more when I have time. This is not in any way a one event coverage situation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 10:45, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
• Comment The admission above is that the coverage of Elder Gong's call as a general authority is significant. Beyond this, the claim that that is the only significant coverage is just plain false. I found 3 articles in 3 different publications in no way tied to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that provide significant coverage of his role in the "Face to Face" event that inaugurated the new Children and Youth Program. That amounts to significant coverage. I also found a review of a book he published in 1984 in a scholarly journal. There is also coverage in relation to his role in the Pacific Ministry Tour of May 2019 that is probably of the type that adds towards passing GNG. This google books reference [https://books.google.com/books?id=RYfabkaAAikC&pg=PA143&lpg=PA143&dq=gerrit+gong&source=bl&ots=4uyd4Lic-5&sig=ACfU3U1JVtbSZBolaoJLbsTxU1UYVgiQwA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj2g6b3ocrqAhXdAZ0JHSkoBng4KBDoATAPegQIChAB#v=onepage&q=gerrit%20gong&f=false] shows sustained engagement with Gong's 1984 book. I am not sure I can sustain fully the fact that Gong was a notable academic, but I can argue that every single aposlte ever has received enough coverage at their call to justify an article, and there is continued coverage of him both long before and long after the event to argue he is notable. This [https://www.sltrib.com/religion/local/2018/06/29/mormon-churchs-newest/] Salt Lake Tribune article was published well over two months after Gong's call as an apostle so undermines the general argument of one event.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:57, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
• And here [https://books.google.com/books?id=sYTwDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=gerrit+gong&source=bl&ots=U5ZiVmQ8y2&sig=ACfU3U358hLZgWysowNGYhUke9PQdpK3lA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj2g6b3ocrqAhXdAZ0JHSkoBng4KBDoATASegQICRAB#v=onepage&q=gerrit%20gong&f=false] is another book that engages with Gong's 1984 work.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:11, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
• And here [https://books.google.com/books?id=sYTwDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=gerrit+gong&source=bl&ots=U5ZiVmQ8y2&sig=ACfU3U358hLZgWysowNGYhUke9PQdpK3lA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj2g6b3ocrqAhXdAZ0JHSkoBng4KBDoATASegQICRAB#v=onepage&q=gerrit%20gong&f=false] is another work that builds significantly on Gong's Memory and History in East and Southeast Asia: Issues of Identity in International Relations.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:14, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
• Comment' I have added a few more sources. I also found this [https://books.google.com/books?id=vMqCDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA65&lpg=PA65&dq=gerrit+gong&source=bl&ots=fiPv8nM1fw&sig=ACfU3U3eUdhqW3KZDGG-hotSfbS_LbdRuQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjM35__psrqAhWOUs0KHdZ2Cw84MhDoATADegQICBAB#v=onepage&q=gerrit%20gong&f=false] yet another place where reaction is given to his 1984 book.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:30, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
• Comment Gong held the Freeman Chair in China Studies at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. This may in and of itself be enough to pass the named chair prong of academic notability. I am not sure enough about the owrkings of this institution to say for sure, but it might be enough.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:34, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
• Here [https://www.thespectrum.com/story/news/local/2018/06/29/lds-leaders-ulisses-soares-gerrit-gong-new-experience/745841002/] is another article on Gong from a publication with no ties to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints published almost 3 months after his call as an apostle.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:37, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
• Keep: Gong is one of 15 top leaders of the church in question. As such, his place in the hierarchy is one that is sufficiently notable to warrant keeping the article about him. In prior discussed attempts to delete articles about apostles like Gong, the overwhelming consensus was to keep those articles. Johnpacklambert has made an earnest attempt here, I feel, to establish independent sourcing outside of sources tied to the Church. And there is no shortage of those. My recommendation would be to pause this nomination for the time being, to give Johnpacklambert and others a chance to fix the alleged problems with this article, but have little hope that the nominator will see this as a reasonable suggestion. It sounds as though Johnpacklambert has made an earnest effort to find sufficiently independent sources as he's noted above, and hopefully he will continue to look for and incorporate such sources in accordance with policy. Hopefully his continued efforts will move the consensus towards a clear "keep" result. --Jgstokes (talk) 02:01, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
• Keep — I can see reliable sources with in-depth significant coverage discussing subject of our discussion. Celestina007 (talk) 11:08, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.