Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Indonesia

Chong Sung Kim

Chong Sung Kim (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Article about politician who does not have presumed notability as per WP:NPOL. Coverage appears to be in local press related to election which he did not win. Mariamnei ✦ ^{reach out 🕊️} 10:03, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Indonesia, Politicians, and Businesspeople. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 10:16, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

I said keep, i don't think this is just routine election coverage, the subject has received coverage from multiple independent reliable sources, including The Straits Times, The Jakarta Post, and Associated Press, The Straits Times and The Jakarta Post each published articles specifically about Chong Sung Kim, covering his background, naturalization, legal career, and campaign, rather than simply listing him as a candidate. There is also additional coverage from Indonesian national media. Based on these sources, I believe the article meets WP:GNG. Being unsuccessful in an election does not by itself make a subject non-notable.

Zekeon ★ ^{Long live Indonesia 🇮🇩} Zekeon (talk) 11:33, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

If you would like to keep this article (I happen to agree with you), you should add appropriate in-line citations. Redvelvetvanilaaaaaaaaa (talk) 14:16, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Law and South Korea. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:01, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep because meets GNG. Also the citation format in the current article is poor; needs inline citations grapesurgeon (talk) 05:45, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

Annisa Suci Ramadhani

Annisa Suci Ramadhani (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Initially I speedy deleted this article, which to my mind meets both the A7 and the G11 criteria. Following a deletion review, where other users did not agree, I've restored it. The subject is a local politician, who would not meet the notability criteria for the English Wikipedia, where we don't include local mayors, council leaders, etc. The criteria may be different at the Indonesian Wikipedia, whence the article was initially translated. Following this, the article was substantially edited by another user with an undeclared COI, which didn't help. The article is laid out in the form of a CV and most earlier versions used the subject's forename, often an indication that they are known to the author, though in this case that is not so. I do not believe that the references provided (one of which is from LinkedIn!) are enough to demonstrate individual notability, so for me it's just a question of whether a "Regent", described in the Regent article as "the English translation of bupati, the head of a kabupaten (second level local government)", is automatically notable. Deb (talk) 16:05, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Women, Law, and Indonesia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:01, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep. Elected leader of the Dharmasraya Regency, which has a population over 240,000. This is not a local mayor or council leader. The position is Regency (Indonesia).

More coverage of Indonesia is needed, not less. The well referenced id:Pemilihan umum Bupati Dharmasraya 2024 needs translations as well, to “2024 Dharmasraya Regental Election. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:41, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Weak delete, but could be persuaded the other way. Here on en.wiki, the relevant guideline on automatic politicial notability is WP:NPOL, which says major local political figures (which I think applies to an Indonesian regent) are presumed notable if they have have received significant press coverage; and just being an elected local official...does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline. So this boils down to the quality and depth of available sourcing. The article does have several sources which appear to be plausibly independent press outlets (in addition to that LinkedIn page). However, to someone like me not from Indonesia, they feel like biographical material, press release-type material, noncritically repeated when a candidate for important local elected office appears. I don't (yet) see the type of editorially independent analysis I think we need for GNG. I try to be sensitive to geographical bias in situations like these, and have looked up 3 random cities with comparable population size (~250k) in Canada; we do have articles on all 3 mayors, but in one case it is a stub that is marginal, and in the other 2, there is a significantly richer and longer press trace and political career on which to ground an article. So I end up, for now, on the delete side. But weakly so, and would switch if anyone could pinpoint 1 or more of the sources here (or provide additional ones) which exhibit genuine editorial independence and independent insight, from which an article could be written that is more than just a CV. Martinp (talk) 22:49, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

She is weak on NPOL, low press coverage, because it was an election with a single candidate. A better solution than deletion is to write 2024 Dharmasraya Regental Election, for which the Indonesian article is well sourced, and to consider merging Annisa Suci Ramadhani into that, if even post-election coverage is not there. SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:08, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete. Dharmasraya Regency is only one of the 19 subdivisions of West Sumatra Province, making the regent a local elected official. As a regent, some coverage is expected, mostly from local news outlets, which I do not think is sufficient to establish notability.

Most of the references in the article also focus on the election itself, especially since she ran unopposed against the empty ballot. Ckfasdf (talk) 02:22, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

It is worth remembering that NPOL is not an exclusive criteria. Not passing NPOL means you refer to GNG, not a disqualification. Juxlos (talk) 02:46, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

IMO, GNG and NPOL are the qualifying criteria to have article in WP. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:51, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

Please give NPOL another read.

People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included.

There is no requirement for NPOL to be passed for GNG to work. That is in NPOL itself. Juxlos (talk) 06:45, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep while not explicitly in WP:NPOL, regents/mayors in Indonesia have a surprising amount of political authority; they are often elected with comparable numbers of votes to a British MP (in this person's case, ~65 thousand) in the small-to-medium sized districts. I have added some coverage of her ~16 month so far term; there are unsurprisingly many press releases if you look up online, but there are adequate amounts of sufficiently independent WP:RS (e.g. Antara, the Sawit website) to pass WP:GNG. Juxlos (talk) 02:46, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

As I mentioned above, a regent will naturally receive some local coverage. This is reflected in the references cited in the article, many of which come from local outlets, such as Antara Sumbar (the West Sumatra branch of Antara), Langgam.id, Regional Kompas, and Minangsatu.com. However, I do not think this level of local coverage is sufficient to establish notability. Ckfasdf (talk) 03:51, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

And what is the issue with local (provincial branch of a national newspaper (Kompas), news agency (Antara), and regional news website for a province of 6 million people) coverage? There are no policies against local newspapers, only WP:ROUTINE; and consider if these are routine:

• Coverage of a local government policy on price controls as a consequence of central government behavior, followed with a (somewhat brief) analysis and context of the background; KOMPAS.com
• Dedicated coverage of (stated) municipal policy on palm oil; Palm oil news website

Juxlos (talk) 07:44, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

First, thanks for adding and expanding. I agree with you that "weak on NPOL" means nothing if GNG is met (the logical flow is the other way - strong on NPOL would but sufficient but is not necessary). That said, I also don't think GNG is met yet. Your adds, while indeed independent coverage mentioning Annisa, are not really substantial coverage of Annisa as an individual. They appear to be routine coverage of declarations and decisions that you would expect arise in any such local unit, not any degree of reflection about this individual and what is specific about them or their activities in their role. So far, we have "X is the acclaimed candiate for [role] in [location]; her resume is Y" sources. And we have "X as [role] declared/decided Y about a local issue in [location]". What we need is "What is characteristic about X in [role] is Y" or "X's background of ... has influenced her actions by ..." or "X is notable for being the first / only ... in [role]" type coverage. Martinp (talk) 09:47, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

• Keep Tempo is a national magazine. Between the profile there and the depth of more regional sources, I feel like GNG is met. As for the coverage focusing on the election... that's par for the course for Indonesian media. The "celebration of democracy" aspect of elections still hasn't died out in almost 30 years, even with a general autocratic backslide in the past decade, and the depth of coverage is significantly greater than one would expect at a comparable level in some countries (in Canada, for example, a county leader race would receive little coverage at the provincial level, let alone at the national level). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 20:25, 16 June 2026 (UTC)
• Keep For many of the reasons listed above, mainly that such a person is similar in representation to an elected MP here in Canada, and in this case has received enough news coverage IMO. Dan Carkner (talk) 03:53, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Keep, strong sources mean even putting aside WP:Politics this passes just under GNG Jishara (talk) 18:04, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:36, 23 June 2026 (UTC)

Investor Daily

Investor Daily (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

no reliable sources, and two of the ones there are effectively non-sequiturs, as they're about its parent company, and don't even mention investor daily. research of my own only net me a bunch of autofellatio, of the kind that got beritasatu sports deleted not long ago

...is what i would say, but there actually is an investor daily with a bunch of sources, secondary or otherwise, to its name! it's an aggressively australian news outlet that focuses on boring gibberish like ai and stocks, yawn. the sources for that are also a big ol' circlejerk, so i don't have much faith in its notability either consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 12:03, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism, News media, Politics, and Indonesia. consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 12:03, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

• Delete - no significant coverage Lijil (talk) 14:01, 9 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete - Publication isn't notable. Eric Schucht (talk) 18:29, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
• Delete Business Newspaper is not notable. There is not significant coverage. Last of The Time (talk) 11:39, 13 June 2026 (UTC)
• Comment. I am seeing quite a lot of academic books (ie , ) , etc) government reports, and articles citing or quoting this publication in google books and scholar. I'm also getting a lot of hits that are this publication with searching for "Investor Daily Indonesia". It's clearly a notable media outlet given the high quality references using it as a source. It think it would be preferable to at the very least find an WP:ATD rather than an outright delete. Note that there may be SIGCOV on this publication not in English.4meter4 (talk) 19:25, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 02:44, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Note: this discussion has been included in the list of Business-related AfD discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:04, 17 June 2026 (UTC)
• Weak Keep: Per the sources provided by 4meter4, significant coverage to establish WP:GNG. CommanderF1 (talk) 10:30, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Um, absolutely not. These sources are not about Investor Daily. They are only citing or quoting Investor Daily. I did not put forward sourcing that meets WP:SIGCOV. I only demonstrated that the publication is respected enough to be used by academics and government organizations which is to my mind enough to demonstrate a need for an WP:ATD alternative to deletion if GNG level coverage can't be found. 4meter4 (talk) 13:16, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

if gng can't be met, what would prevent deletion? nothing in a deletion would prevent recreation, and nothing in the article would currently be worth keeping. moving to draft or userspace could work if someone managed to find sigcov (from a third look, i still haven't been able to find any in any language), but without said sigcov being found, that's only not putting the cart before the horse because horses aren't real

as a sort of aside, citations to and mentions of it are scant around wikipedia too, only being mentioned in passing in the articles about its sister newspapers or as a newspaper being cited. neither of which would impede just deleting in absence of coverage usable for an article consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 13:29, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

Although the subject is a newspaper and established two decades ago. CommanderF1 (talk) 17:42, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

• Redirect to List of newspapers in Indonesia per WP:ATD.4meter4 (talk) 23:04, 18 June 2026 (UTC)

  where it'll be an unsourced mention that will still be vague with the marginally more notable australian outlet? consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 18:36, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:00, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

i'll note for now that commanderf1 has been cu blocked... but the case is a little weird, in that it might just be ip jank at play. to avoid things getting weird, i won't strike the vote or comment consarn _{(talk beige) (count ribs)} 18:34, 30 June 2026 (UTC)