Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nguyen Manh Cuong

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. MBisanz ^talk 23:15, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nguyen Manh Cuong

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

Not enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to verify or sustian article. Fails Wikipedia's General Notability Guidelines and WP:MUSICBIO. Writing a lot of songs and being a semi-finalist in a song writing competition, while significant personal achievements are not notable by Wikipedia standards. Jbh ^Talk 09:01, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 09:02, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Vietnam-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 09:04, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 09:04, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 09:04, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. I had the same concerns myself. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 20:43, 12 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Teeny weeny keep with one seeming reference here at [1]. Optakeover^(U)(T)(C) 05:59, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 06:00, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as there's not only still nothing actually convincing as a substance article, but there's questionability about this overall where speedy would nearly apply. SwisterTwister talk 23:46, 25 October 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.