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 delete. Sandstein 10:26, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hanggao Observatory (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 may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline. eflyjason (talk) 14:14, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. eflyjason (talk) 14:17, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. eflyjason (talk) 14:17, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• There is a similar article on the Chinese Wikipedia. I personally think that the article can still be save through cleanup and eliminating some parts which are not in accordance to the english wiki. Ernestchuajiasheng (talk) 16:10, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it meets notability in Chinese Wikipedia, but not in English Wikipedia. --eflyjason (talk) 16:14, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete High school club article created by a member: HGOB was a SPA whose name matches the abbreviation used by the group. The only references are to non-independent sources and to high-school level academic competitions. No evidence of notability under any standard. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:39, 20 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• delete fails GNG. typical promotional spam with reference padding etc. Jytdog (talk) 02:03, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Questions about notability were raised even on the Chinese Wikipedia. Translation of a comment posted on the article's talk page seven years ago: "This page gives a feeling of self-promotion. Moreover, it does not carry a neutral viewpoint. The article gives a selective bias to overtly positive information about the society that, to a large extent, is not verifiable." (此页面有自传宣传的嫌疑。并且不带有中立观点。文章都集中描述该天文台的正面讯息，且很多内容难以查证。) --Vihelik (talk) 04:39, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:36, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Would a merge or at least redirect to Hangzhou High School be plausible? - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 01:47, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That article looks just as spammy as this one and should probably also be deleted.... Jytdog (talk) 02:02, 28 December 2017 (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.