Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loo Kang Wee

:{{la|Loo Kang Wee}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Loo_Kang_Wee Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Loo Kang Wee}})

Non-notable, fails WP:BIO JMHamo (talk) 23:08, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

• Weak delete. One of the clear claims of notability is the UNESCO... award. But its ref only says that it went to the OSP@SG project, not to this person and not that this person was key in the project. Overblown claims are a great example of why this autobio needs WP:TNT rather than having to take everything under a microscope to make sure what is here is truly okay. DMacks (talk) 02:22, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:27, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:27, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:27, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

• Delete. As above. Ciridae (talk) 03:47, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
• Delete Yup, the award went to the organisation not to the person. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:33, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
• Delete - There doesn't seem to be enough coverage about the man himself, merely brief mentions. I would have suggested a merge to OSP@SG, but none of the hits I could find discuss his work on the project in great detail. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 11:39, 5 April 2016 (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.