Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CJ Santos

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. So Why 15:27, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

CJ Santos[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)

Non-notable radio host of a non-notable show, fails WP:GNG. All sources I can find are from the stations/unreliable sources. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:47, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Not because the person doesn't have much of an online presence doesn't mean that he is not notable. There is enough evidence including images and videos to support the notability of this page. Please do not remove. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalaboomsky (talk • contribs) 14:55, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not demonstrated by images or videos. It is demonstrated by reliable source coverage about him. Bearcat (talk) 18:09, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. AmericanAir88 (talk) 14:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. AmericanAir88 (talk) 14:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. AmericanAir88 (talk) 14:59, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Just tell me what needs to be removed or questionable areas on the article that needs removing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kalaboomsky (talk • contribs) 15:31, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In this discussion, specifying which Wikipedia notability policy the subject meets would be a helpful first step. Bakazaka (talk) 21:02, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article has advertorial overtones; the referencing is entirely to primary and unreliable sources, not to any evidence of reliable source coverage about him in real media; and Kalaboomsky's use of the plural we, rather than "I", above, is pinging my conflict of interest radar. Bearcat (talk) 18:09, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment. Article is updated and removed areas with "advertorial" overtones. Pardon me for using "we". I always have a personal tendency that if i am not using my name, i refer to my callsign a third person. I guess its not going to work on this community. So sorry. I never mean to confuse you.
Delete Search finds lack of significant coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources, so fails WP:GNG. Additionally, article uses misleading citations. For example, the film review cited to support subject's role in movie does not mention the subject at all. Bakazaka (talk) 19:09, 20 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment additional citation is added for your reference.

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.