Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Sandino

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. The Bushranger One ping only 09:58, 23 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

David Sandino[edit]

David Sandino (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unconvinced that career to date classes the subject as notable enough for inclusion Flaming Ferrari (talk) 21:23, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Active in local politics in Yolo County, CA, but not actually elected to anything there. Appointed to his current job in 2007 by Schwarzenegger, and has not had significant coverage since. In fact, even his appointment to the post only made his hometown paper (and one other little one nearby), not even the Sacramento Bee covered the appointment. Note that I added these two to the article just now. It seems that he is not notable.— alf laylah wa laylah (talk) 21:52, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Being the chief counsel for a small department of a sub-national entity does not make someone notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:53, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not notable. Thanks for trying, Alf; it appears the coverage just isn't there. --MelanieN (talk) 16:56, 22 February 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.