Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mariana Atencio

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. Sandstein 18:59, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Mariana Atencio[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)

Fails criteria for WP:GNG, having no significant WP:RS specifically on her. Journalists and TV reporters are not nominally notable. The article has resume qualities, WP:NOTCV. Several sources are WP:PRIMARY or via Google or Tumblr. Similar criteria for deletion as for this TV reporter. Zefr (talk) 20:10, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Zefr (talk) 20:10, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. Zefr (talk) 20:10, 19 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep I think she clearly meets notability. This ref 1) here and this ref 2) here are specifically on her and WP:RS.--The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 01:09, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:15, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Coverage seems to revolve around her "Latinaness", but I think she satisfies the general notability guideline in that there is enough coverage about her on reliable, independent sources that would make her article viable. There could even be an argument made under WP:AUTHOR. Best, PK650 (talk) 22:23, 22 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:25, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:48, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Venezuela-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 09:48, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Seems fine, passes GNG and the sources aren't as fictitious as the nominator suggests. Kingsif (talk) 11:09, 27 January 2020 (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.