Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andre Quintero

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. ✗plicit 06:17, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Andre Quintero[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Unnotable politician holding an unnotable office. I can't any find any significant sources outside of a cannabis scheme which he was implicated in, which I don't believe suffices in terms of notability. This page was originally part of the 48-article bundle at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fidel Vargas, which was closed as a procedural keep due to the bundle's size. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 05:23, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nomination. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 23:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. El Monte CA is nowhere close to large enough that its mayors would receive an automatic presumption of notability just for existing as mayors — the notability test at the local level of office hinges not on minimally verifying that the person exists, but on maximally sourcing substantial content about their political impact: specific things they did as mayor, specific projects they spearheaded as mayor, significant effects their mayoralty had on the development of the city, and on and so forth. But there's nothing like that here, and the article is based entirely on primary sources that aren't support for notability at all, with absolutely no evidence shown at all that he has enough media coverage to pass NPOL #2. Bearcat (talk) 21:09, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you are not bias in respect to his worthiness then here is a link to support his notability.

https://www.whittierdailynews.com/2013/09/27/community-welcomes-new-rio-hondo-college-president/

https://www.latimes.com/local/la-me-adv-elmontepensions-20170119-story.html

https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/Licensee/Detail/219606

https://www.seiu721.org/2010/02/andre-quintero-seiu-721-member-and-mayor.php Ndmartz (talk) 16:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A few mentions in local papers and one article in the LA Times does not prove notability. I'm not sure what you thought you were proving here; of the four links you posted, one is a .gov link and another is SEIU which is not a news outlet. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 22:22, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with BottleofChocolateMilk. Notability not asserted; in source 1 he is only mentioned, source 3 is a standard government profile that means nothing in terms of notability, source 4 is a promotional essay written by Quintero himself, and source 2, the only one worth anything, still is not sufficient for notability and is just a report on average city going-ons. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 22:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I think the community is moving away from size of population as being a determinant of whether a stand-alone page is warranted. Bearcat is right about what we are looking for in a local elected official - secondary source material that describes an official's impact in the community, or national or international coverage where the subject is featured. I do not see anything in this case that suggests the subject meets the threshold for a stand-alone article. --Enos733 (talk) 20:00, 7 February 2024 (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.