Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adriana Valdés (2nd nomination)

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 keep. Thanks to those who have fixed the article. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010 • (talk) 16:01, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adriana Valdés

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

Non notable individual, badly translated biography. Diego Grez (talk) 01:04, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is so badly written that notability is difficult to determine. I would give the authors an opportunity to significantly re-write and add references to positive and negative criticism.--Rpclod (talk) 01:55, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Seems notable. Agree that the biography appears badly translated. However, notability is asserted as her being named a member/fellow of the Chilean Academy of Language in 1993, and her being the first woman deputy director of the Academy, elected in 2010 and again in 2013 per the article, as well as having received a 2010 Altazor Award in literary essay category for her book "Enrique Lihn: vistas parciales". Article lists 5 books by her. Calls for tags to improve the article, or notice at some appropriate WikiProject, not for deletion of the article. --do ncr am 01:56, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I see the first AFD was just closed 15 July 2014 with no consensus. By the way, I note a good argument for Keep there with reference to wp:AUTHOR criteria. It seems poor form to immediately re-nominate this for deletion, with no new information or explanation why revisiting this so soon would be a good use of Wikipedia editors' attention. It seems to me appropriate that this should be closed immediately. --do ncr am 02:03, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:23, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. This rapid vexatious renomination should be closed. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:37, 16 July 2014 (UTC).[reply]
Comment. Actually, I was wrong at least in part, and want to apologize to User:Diego Grez. At similar Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pedro Olmos Muñoz (2nd nomination), i am informed by User:Stalwart111 that a policy/guideline WP:NPASR applies, and an AFDd article can be renominated immediately, especially if there is little/no participation and no consensus. So, sorry, Diego Grez, i don't think it was poor form after all. I now think it is a matter of subjective judgment whether it is good to try to garner attention again right away or not. I personally would not have renominated this one, while in that other case there had been no participation at all. Anyhow, this AFD should continue and focus simply on the merits of the article; a closer should consider what was said in first AFD and what is said here, on merits of the article. --do ncr am 15:17, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The more the article develops, the more clear it is she is one of the leading literary figures in Chile. The national association she belongs to seems to be a limited membership one of the type that belonging to it would seem to grant notability. Her awards also may well cause her to pass notability. It still needs to be re-worded to be easier to understand, but being hard to understand is not grounds for deletion, and the article is a lot better than when it was first nominated.John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:55, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment My Spanish is a bit rusty, but I think I got the general sense of what the biography on her from the Pontifical Catholic University of Chile was saying. If anyone who is more fluent in Spanish than me wants to check over and make sure I didn't make any mistakes, and also possible see if there is more relevant information to extract from the biography, I would encourage them to do so.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:04, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, §FreeRangeFrog^croak 17:09, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Repeating my view from 29th June on the first run of the AfD: "there is enough verifiable here to link the subject with an academy and an award, on both of which Wikipedia has articles, indicating that she meets WP:AUTHOR criteria." AllyD (talk) 06:33, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There are sufficient RS to verify notability. --– sampi ^{(talk•contrib•email)} 07:33, 27 July 2014 (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.