The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. - Mailer Diablo 11:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shanghai woman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Original Reseach,no references Ksyrie 05:20, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I've checked the first 5 pages of Google hits for "Shanghai woman" + prostitute and all them them are Wikipedia mirrors or apparently taken from this article (ie [1]). Fails WP:ATT and WP:V. Saikokira 05:29, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment.I did the same things with you ,and find the same results.--Ksyrie 05:36, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletions. cab 11:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete likely hoax and/or attack page. None of Google books hits for "shanghai woman" [2] or "shanghai women" [3] up until 1970 use it in this sense, which lends doubt to the idea that it's an "obsolete English expression". The topic of Shanghai women (i.e. womens' issues in Shanghai, sociological studies of women from Shanghai) might be encyclopedic, but we should get this junk out of the history first. cab 11:13, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above comments. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 19:14, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, WP:HOAX, WP:V, WP:ATT. Looks more like an attack page. Terence 13:30, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.