Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foxmail
I'm changing my vote.  I've agreed all along that the sources are sufficient to meet .  I continue to question the practicality and likelihood of producing a worthwhile encyclopedic article in English when every meaningful secondary source is in another language.  I think this is likely to end up either largely unverifiable to most users or based pretty much only on the primary sources.  But I concede this is strictly an editorial problem and that (a) it's entirely possible I'm too pessimistic and (b) the editorial problem is irrelevant to this decision at AfD.Finally, I will add that ''to me'', the complaints of possible bias looked more like examples of it than anything else.  For me, it wouldn't have mattered if the sources were in the one other language I ''can'' read (sort of); I'd still have had the same concerns.  And I agreed with the "better in China" remark ''as I understood it'', namely, a wry, ironic observation that it'd be a simpler question if the resulting article was supposed to be in Chinese as well, the same as the sources.  We should be able to talk about these things without chilling the room.  I'd have appreciated better demonstration of 
— User:Msnicki, 01:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:AGF (Wikipedia:Notability)