Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheng Xian

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 keep. John254 16:49, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sheng Xian

This person was mentioned once in history, in the discussion regarding several characters who themselves were not of particular historical importance. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 20:24, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. ——Quasirandom (talk) 21:43, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete for lack of an obvious redirect candidate. JJL (talk) 22:54, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the Chinese Wikipedia article certainly had more to say about the person, and my copy of de Crespigny's Biographical Dictionary of Later Han to the Three Kingdoms confirms that the person was mentioned many more times than once. His execution by Sun Quan led to the rebellion of Dai Yuan and Gui Lan, and thus the assassination of Sun Yi. _dk (talk) 23:48, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment it would be helpful to have more sources in the article in that case! JJL (talk) 23:54, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Being remembered from the 2nd century AD seems to be notable in itself.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 01:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Lean toward Keep When it comes to historical figures I'd rather keep and add info as found. It's not like a modern celebrity where the info's all over the web or it doesn't exist.--Cube lurker (talk) 03:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Reliable sources found by _dk. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - seems to be a perfectly notable historical figure. matt91486 (talk) 23:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - certainly passes WP:BIO (as governor of subnational entity, the commandery). It's recentism to apply that differently for 2nd century figures. Rigadoun (talk) 06:26, 3 January 2008 (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.