Deletion of Sum Ying Fung

Comment: The subject passes Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline with coverage in ''The Province'', CBC.ca, ''加拿大家园'', and ''The Vancouver Sun''. {{user|Deryck Chan}}'s arguments against  are convincing. I strongly agree with his eloquent comment that: In a sense, all biographies are "pedestrian life details". It is the extent of biographical coverage in reliable sources, not some arbitrary criterion for "importance", that determines notability
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOPAGE)

Comment: Controversial I expect but I https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sum_Ying_Fung&type=revision&diff=690743149&oldid=689855104 removed the hints that her claim isn't valid. As noted, there are only the three reliable sources provided that assert her birthdate of 1899 and absent a reliable source debunking it, it should be treated as a  theory that she actually wasn't born in 1899
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Fringe theories (WP:FRINGE)

Comment: WP:PERMASTUB, . "At the claimed age" -- don't we know
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOPAGE)

Comment: per nom.  There are no policy-based arguments to be made that either the age is, per se notable, nor that this person, who lacks  has met the requirements of . Even if they had,  counsels that, rather than a stand-alone article, inclusion in a list might be appropriate. Gender bias, raised above, is not a factor here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SIGCOV||WP:GNG||WP:NOPAGE)