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. The article having NPOV and BLP issues is not an argument for deletion. As it is proved in the article, the previous AfD, and here that this person is just not known because of one single event. Notability is clearly established and if there are issues with the article, they can always be fixed. (non-admin closure) Ya sh ! 01:35, 15 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Song Yoo-geun (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A boy/student who is only known for plagiarizing a (single) paper he co-wrote. Not known for anything else. Tadeusz Nowak ( talk) 19:17, 1 January 2016 (UTC) reply

I didn't realize this article was discussed before, but I still think it should be either deleted or redirected to a more appropriate article, there is no independent notability for a stand-alone biographical article on a student in this case. Tadeusz Nowak ( talk) 19:20, 1 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:13, 8 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:13, 8 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 01:13, 8 January 2016 (UTC) reply

• Keep or Speedy Keep -- I know it was an honest mistake in not noticing the prior AfD, but I'd suggest that the nominator withdraw; last Keep conclusion was less than a month ago, and consensus is very unlikely to have changed in that time. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 02:17, 8 January 2016 (UTC) reply

• Delete Violates WP:NPOV. I think the page does have possible notability however there are bigger problems with it. Basically the page seems to be a huge recount of this persons scandal rather than being a page about the individual. For instance the sections are titled "life before october 2015" and "Controversy" which shows clear focus on a negative issue for no reason since the person has other claims to fame. They were the youngest person in South Korea to be accepted into a university and were considered a prodigy, which isn't mentioned at all in the articles opening. Several of the references though are specifically about that and not the scandal but still the plagiarism seems to be the overall focus of the page. Therefore I find the article to be in violation of WP:BLP guidelines. Peachywink ( talk) 17:59, 10 January 2016 (UTC) reply
• Keep for the same reasons that this article was closed as keep less than a month ago. It is completely untrue that this individual is "only known for plagiarizing a (single) paper he co-wrote". In Korea, this individual has seen significant media coverage for many years. Sources that indicate notability are abundant (but not in English). The plagiarism issue is just the latest reason he has received media attention. If editors see problems with the article in terms of NPOV and BLP, that is a reason to improve the article's content (or maybe trim bad content) rather than delete the article. 웃웃 ( talk) 15:40, 12 January 2016 (UTC) reply
• Keep. What is supposed to have changed during the short laps of time from the former discussion? Nevertheless, for the benefit of User:Tadeusz Nowak, and other people that could have difficulties in finding the previous discussion, let us recall that this article is about "something has turned wrong in a long term process 2005-2015". In other words, serially breaching the academic rules in order to "grow the future Korean Nobel Prize in Physic" (and serially depicting doubts as jealousy) has produced unforeseen results. The formal retractation of an article, published by the American Astronomical Society, motivated by an exceptionally large overlap with a paper published in 2002 was the emerging part of a long term process, and was absolutely not a random copyvio by a random student. It was the total breakdown of what should have been the PhD thesis of a star student (and of the large amount of money and staff involved in the process). This has generated a lot of articles published in Reliable Sources. For the people that cannot read Korean, it exists however many articles written in English, see The Korea Herald (www.koreaherald.com), Korean Joongang Daily (koreajoongangdaily.joins.com, 3 articles), Korea Times (www.koreatimes.co.kr, among them an Editorial comment), Yonhap News Agency (english.yonhapnews.co.kr), The Donga Ilbo (english.donga.com). Therefore, the long term notability is obvious. What to say about this long term process, from 2005 to 2015, is a content discussion, not to be discussed here. Pldx1 ( talk) 17:54, 12 January 2016 (UTC) reply

Maybe it would be better if the article wasn't named after the individual but rather was about the incident since that seems to already be what the article is about. Even pages for murderers have early life sections not "life before the crime" sections. Currently I think there is a negative point of view in the overall writing of this article but if it wasn't a BLP page than that would change things. Peachywink ( talk) 19:27, 12 January 2016 (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.