Deletion of List of heads of Hong Kong by education

Comment: for much the same reasons as the Singapore article.  I have carefully read the arguments of the article creator but none of them are convincing.  The issue is not that the article lacks sources; I don't doubt that each entry on the list can be sourced and that every person on the list is notable.  The issue is that it lacks sources discussing the ''subject'' of the page – that is, the education of the heads of Hong Kong as a group.  Wikipedia totting up the alma maters of the heads and making something of it is .  Without sources on the subject, there are no viable alternatives to deletion.  It cannot be improved or merged or redirected without such a source.  This is not a subjective decision as claimed, it is based entirely on the objective existence or otherwise of such sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:SYNTH)

Comment: following largely the analysis previously outlined in the Singapore article. Please note that criteria for inclusion should factor in encyclopaedic and topical relevance, not just verifiable existence, the fact that the references can be found is not sufficient for a list article to survive AFD, see . Additionally, this particular convergence appears too specific to warrant a list per . Further, recall that it is not sufficient for notability that the separate subjects of the list be notable on their own for a cross-categorization lists to be viable. There is no evidence so far that this cross-categorization list has been independently covered as a group or set by reliable sources, see  and , and the fact some similiar lists exist is not particularly relevent when they do have independent coverage (e.g. List of bridges in Toronto is a good list but List of bridges in Whitehorse is not). Criteria such as these must be met because Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information . There is no need for a merge because the educational and other data can be independently retained on the article for each listed individual. If you have further objections, or think this an insufficient justification please respond below so I can reconsider, thanks
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists (WP:LSC||WP:SALAT||WP:LISTN||WP:NOTDIR||WP:IINFO)

Comment: As per normal process as it fails |notability and no encyclopedic purpose
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)