Deletion of Wang Zhong (Ming dynasty)

Comment: for reasons I'll go into below. But first I must say I'd be tempted to vote keep just because of the flaws in the arguments above to delete. As has been stated above, creation of this page is not even remotely |pointy, it's a valid response to the RM discussion and should be commended. (This deletion nomination is however arguably pointy, being raised by the nom of the RM.) Now to the positives: The subject does pass the |GNG, barely but clearly. Chinese Wikipedia https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%BB%B4%E5%9F%BA%E6%96%87%E5%BA%93 has a similar stub (but I assume the Wikisource document(s?) to which it links are the source discussed above). https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Wang+Zhong+(Ming+dynasty)+-Wikipedia Google web search gives me over a million hits, hard to say (not reading Chinese) how relevant any are but certainly a case to answer, https://www.google.com.au/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=Wang+Zhong+(Ming+dynasty)+-Wikipedia&tbm=bks Google books almost five thousand, similarly not easy to tell how relevant and some at least are not, I even had a look at Google images which may be more productive but still time consuming. In conclusion, a good stub which should be given a chance
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:point)

Comment: History of Ming is not considered a primary source by wikipedia definition. Actually, it's based on numerous historical records, and clearly secondary. Since secondary sources can be used as references, the fact that a book is often uesd as referencing by English books doesn't mean it's primary at all. (See ) Having a biography on such a source and being honoured "靖安侯" will definitely get him past . --Special:Contributions/114.81.255.40|114.81.255.40
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:PRIMARY||WP:ANYBIO)

Comment: History of the Ming'' is 322 volumes long. Everybody and his dog got a bio. So 47 characters is really nothing at all. The book is usually treated as archival material anyway. As far as English-language coverage goes, he is mentioned once in a Yongle bio. This article was created to make a  about disambiguation policy, not to serve the reader
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Do not disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point (WP:POINT)