- 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. No support for deletion. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 ( talk) 18:59, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Hong Kong Olympiad in Informatics
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Hong Kong Olympiad in Informatics ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No coverage in reliable sources in either language; this article has been unsourced for over a decade. PROD challenged without tackling my rationale. wumbolo ^^^ 19:08, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- Comment the parent topic
International Olympiad in Informatics is notable, so whatever the consensus here is, this shouldn't be a delete as it would be a valid redirect to the parent topic, so a default of redirect should be considered per policy
WP:ATD-R
deletion is not required
. Widefox; talk 00:04, 24 September 2018 (UTC) - Comment Quality sources for notabilty seem hard to come by. Alternatives including merging with Hong Kong Mathematics Olympiad (which actually is more famous to my inderstanding), or changing to 'Hong Kong Olympiads' and embracing the other Olypiad disciplines (Perhaps leaving mathematics as own article as originally individually famous). Citations for Hong Kong Olympiads (combined) are easier to come by. However I get the feeling HK government press releases such as [1] might be regarded as a scrutenised significanet, reviewed and reliable source by any reasonable judgement. I am, minded the PROD challenge was likely in good faith that an attempt would be made to update the article, albeit not probably (so far at least) to a standard acceptable to the nominator. The challenger has also declared a COI and has had edits applied through due process. But I think we would welcome the challenger comments here and especially if independent sources can be identified. As a last resort in the event the outcome is delete can I request draftification. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark ( talk) 23:27, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Note: COI. There is no doubt that the article requires clean up to remove NPOV and add sources. That is why I requested edit to only fix the most vital facts (in the lead section) and added two sources. The question is whether the subject meets notability requirement. First please understand that most newspapers and magazines in Hong Kong do not keep their old issues online, though they are accessible from the public library and the e-database Wisenews. So I visited the library to look for sources. I am listing some of the higher quality sources for fellow wikipedians to assess them. Thank you very much. Micro tony 17:19, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ "國際電腦奧林匹克賽金牌得主 潘永志「零的突破」". Ta Kung Pao. 31 December 1997. A11.
- ^ "電腦奧運賽港生摘金". Sing Tao Daily. 31 December 1997. A8.
- ^ "電腦奧林匹克 培正中學奪魁". Ta Kung Pao. 2 December 1998. A12.
- ^ "培正中學多電腦奇才 ───電腦教師鍾偉東談學生得獎經過". Hong Kong Commercial Daily. 5 December 1998. B01.
- ^ "九八年度香港電腦奧林匹克競賽成績好". Sing Tao Daily. 12 December 1998. B18.
- ^ "香港電腦奧賽喇沙稱王". Ta Kung Pao. 29 January 2003. B02.
- ^ "國際電腦奧林匹克拔萃生奪金牌". Apple Daily. 25 August 2003. A16.
- ^ "電腦奧林匹克 喇沙奪學校大獎". Wen Wei Po. 7 January 2006. A12.
- ^ "國際電腦奧賽 港生奪金". Wen Wei Po. 24 August 2006. A13.
- ^ "編程式獲獎學生再出戰 「港府投放資源不足」". Oriental Daily. 26 October 2017. A19.
- ^ "香港電腦奧林匹克 薪火相傳大作戰". e-zone. 27 November 2014. pp. 49–52.
- ^ "港中學生NOI賽獲取佳績". PCM. 27 July 2018.
- ^ "國際電腦奧林匹克競賽港奪一銀二銅". e-zone. 17 September 2018. p. 6.
- ^ "堅持教授程式編寫 為資訊科技界培育幼苗" (PDF). 培正校刊. 44 (2): 47–52. 3 July 2010.
- Weak keep ... but I am dependent upon either the Government press releases being acceptable (e.g. see my comment above) in this context or Microtony's good faith interpretation of those resources to be acceptable and that they have content specifically to the Hong Kong Informatics Olympiad and not merely a passing mention within other Olympiad disciplines or the Internatioanl Olympiad for Informatics. I am however minded it is some implausible such resources would not exist and Microtony's location of the same seems reasonable. On an aside I must point out to the closer that due to interactions on other AfD's it may be felt my vote may be not neutral and biased .... above all I urge this should not reflect on Microtony whose COI declaration and conduct seem in good faith. Unfortunately the South China Morning Post does not seem to hold any not does The China Daily Post as far as I can tell. I guess my preference if an independent Wikipedian in Hong Kong could check. 23:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per Microtony. The sources he quoted establish the existence of persistent coverage as required by
WP:GNG. Full disclosure: am a former member of article subject --
Deryck
C.
18:47, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- @
Deryck Chan:
WP:GNG doesn't say "persistent"; it says "significant". So we can't rely on
WP:PRIMARYNEWS, press releases and
interviews. If some article that is mentioned above contains third-party commentary outside of what I mentioned in my previous sentence, feel free to point it out.
wumbolo
^^^
19:23, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- As far as I understand, WP:PRIMARYNEWS is only relevant to notability where the article is about a one-off event. For recurrent events, news coverage over multiple instances of the event (persistence) can add up to count as significant coverage. Deryck C. 16:02, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
- @
Deryck Chan:
WP:GNG doesn't say "persistent"; it says "significant". So we can't rely on
WP:PRIMARYNEWS, press releases and
interviews. If some article that is mentioned above contains third-party commentary outside of what I mentioned in my previous sentence, feel free to point it out.
wumbolo
^^^
19:23, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Quick reply to Wumbolo above before I go to sleep. #4 and #14 are entirely third-party (interview of/article written by a school). Newspaper/magazine sources containing some commentary: #5.. source says (my translation) "... This kind of competition requires high level of problem solving and programming ability. Students has to have a lot of passion and solid experience in order to excel in the competition. There is nothing like this in Hong Kong...." #10: Subject was not involved in the direct interview with student. #12: (my translation) "... Good competitions uses daily live problems. For example, Google maps is like shortest path problem... Students has to solve problems quickly and correctly. The best solutions can process hundreds of thousands of paths or characters in a second. The level of difficulty is very high" #13: (my translation) "...This shows that the computational thinking ability of Hong Kong students are definitely not worse than overseas'" // Actually I found another source: (my translation) "...His tone is full of confidence. Trust that he will triumph again and win awards for Hong Kong.... 21st centuries females should not be looked-down upon. (name ommited) is the only representative to NOI this year... She is good but modest." [1] - Micro tony 21:11, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ "拔萃生挑戰全國信息高手 赴京參加青年奧林匹克競賽". Sing Tao Daily. 29 February 2000. A16.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:48, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:48, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
- Weak keep two tech magazines (two independent sources, 3 articles) just scrapes GNG. Widefox; talk 22:20, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. No support for deletion. (non-admin closure) Atlantic306 ( talk) 18:59, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
Hong Kong Olympiad in Informatics
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Hong Kong Olympiad in Informatics ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No coverage in reliable sources in either language; this article has been unsourced for over a decade. PROD challenged without tackling my rationale. wumbolo ^^^ 19:08, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:22, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
- Comment the parent topic
International Olympiad in Informatics is notable, so whatever the consensus here is, this shouldn't be a delete as it would be a valid redirect to the parent topic, so a default of redirect should be considered per policy
WP:ATD-R
deletion is not required
. Widefox; talk 00:04, 24 September 2018 (UTC) - Comment Quality sources for notabilty seem hard to come by. Alternatives including merging with Hong Kong Mathematics Olympiad (which actually is more famous to my inderstanding), or changing to 'Hong Kong Olympiads' and embracing the other Olypiad disciplines (Perhaps leaving mathematics as own article as originally individually famous). Citations for Hong Kong Olympiads (combined) are easier to come by. However I get the feeling HK government press releases such as [1] might be regarded as a scrutenised significanet, reviewed and reliable source by any reasonable judgement. I am, minded the PROD challenge was likely in good faith that an attempt would be made to update the article, albeit not probably (so far at least) to a standard acceptable to the nominator. The challenger has also declared a COI and has had edits applied through due process. But I think we would welcome the challenger comments here and especially if independent sources can be identified. As a last resort in the event the outcome is delete can I request draftification. Thankyou. Djm-leighpark ( talk) 23:27, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep Note: COI. There is no doubt that the article requires clean up to remove NPOV and add sources. That is why I requested edit to only fix the most vital facts (in the lead section) and added two sources. The question is whether the subject meets notability requirement. First please understand that most newspapers and magazines in Hong Kong do not keep their old issues online, though they are accessible from the public library and the e-database Wisenews. So I visited the library to look for sources. I am listing some of the higher quality sources for fellow wikipedians to assess them. Thank you very much. Micro tony 17:19, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ "國際電腦奧林匹克賽金牌得主 潘永志「零的突破」". Ta Kung Pao. 31 December 1997. A11.
- ^ "電腦奧運賽港生摘金". Sing Tao Daily. 31 December 1997. A8.
- ^ "電腦奧林匹克 培正中學奪魁". Ta Kung Pao. 2 December 1998. A12.
- ^ "培正中學多電腦奇才 ───電腦教師鍾偉東談學生得獎經過". Hong Kong Commercial Daily. 5 December 1998. B01.
- ^ "九八年度香港電腦奧林匹克競賽成績好". Sing Tao Daily. 12 December 1998. B18.
- ^ "香港電腦奧賽喇沙稱王". Ta Kung Pao. 29 January 2003. B02.
- ^ "國際電腦奧林匹克拔萃生奪金牌". Apple Daily. 25 August 2003. A16.
- ^ "電腦奧林匹克 喇沙奪學校大獎". Wen Wei Po. 7 January 2006. A12.
- ^ "國際電腦奧賽 港生奪金". Wen Wei Po. 24 August 2006. A13.
- ^ "編程式獲獎學生再出戰 「港府投放資源不足」". Oriental Daily. 26 October 2017. A19.
- ^ "香港電腦奧林匹克 薪火相傳大作戰". e-zone. 27 November 2014. pp. 49–52.
- ^ "港中學生NOI賽獲取佳績". PCM. 27 July 2018.
- ^ "國際電腦奧林匹克競賽港奪一銀二銅". e-zone. 17 September 2018. p. 6.
- ^ "堅持教授程式編寫 為資訊科技界培育幼苗" (PDF). 培正校刊. 44 (2): 47–52. 3 July 2010.
- Weak keep ... but I am dependent upon either the Government press releases being acceptable (e.g. see my comment above) in this context or Microtony's good faith interpretation of those resources to be acceptable and that they have content specifically to the Hong Kong Informatics Olympiad and not merely a passing mention within other Olympiad disciplines or the Internatioanl Olympiad for Informatics. I am however minded it is some implausible such resources would not exist and Microtony's location of the same seems reasonable. On an aside I must point out to the closer that due to interactions on other AfD's it may be felt my vote may be not neutral and biased .... above all I urge this should not reflect on Microtony whose COI declaration and conduct seem in good faith. Unfortunately the South China Morning Post does not seem to hold any not does The China Daily Post as far as I can tell. I guess my preference if an independent Wikipedian in Hong Kong could check. 23:29, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep per Microtony. The sources he quoted establish the existence of persistent coverage as required by
WP:GNG. Full disclosure: am a former member of article subject --
Deryck
C.
18:47, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- @
Deryck Chan:
WP:GNG doesn't say "persistent"; it says "significant". So we can't rely on
WP:PRIMARYNEWS, press releases and
interviews. If some article that is mentioned above contains third-party commentary outside of what I mentioned in my previous sentence, feel free to point it out.
wumbolo
^^^
19:23, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- As far as I understand, WP:PRIMARYNEWS is only relevant to notability where the article is about a one-off event. For recurrent events, news coverage over multiple instances of the event (persistence) can add up to count as significant coverage. Deryck C. 16:02, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
- @
Deryck Chan:
WP:GNG doesn't say "persistent"; it says "significant". So we can't rely on
WP:PRIMARYNEWS, press releases and
interviews. If some article that is mentioned above contains third-party commentary outside of what I mentioned in my previous sentence, feel free to point it out.
wumbolo
^^^
19:23, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Quick reply to Wumbolo above before I go to sleep. #4 and #14 are entirely third-party (interview of/article written by a school). Newspaper/magazine sources containing some commentary: #5.. source says (my translation) "... This kind of competition requires high level of problem solving and programming ability. Students has to have a lot of passion and solid experience in order to excel in the competition. There is nothing like this in Hong Kong...." #10: Subject was not involved in the direct interview with student. #12: (my translation) "... Good competitions uses daily live problems. For example, Google maps is like shortest path problem... Students has to solve problems quickly and correctly. The best solutions can process hundreds of thousands of paths or characters in a second. The level of difficulty is very high" #13: (my translation) "...This shows that the computational thinking ability of Hong Kong students are definitely not worse than overseas'" // Actually I found another source: (my translation) "...His tone is full of confidence. Trust that he will triumph again and win awards for Hong Kong.... 21st centuries females should not be looked-down upon. (name ommited) is the only representative to NOI this year... She is good but modest." [1] - Micro tony 21:11, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
References
- ^ "拔萃生挑戰全國信息高手 赴京參加青年奧林匹克競賽". Sing Tao Daily. 29 February 2000. A16.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:48, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 14:48, 29 September 2018 (UTC)
- Weak keep two tech magazines (two independent sources, 3 articles) just scrapes GNG. Widefox; talk 22:20, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
- 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.