Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Silvester Brito

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. Consensus here is that NAUTHOR is barely passed. Weak keep is still keep. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 22:40, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Silvester Brito[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)

He exists, but I couldn't see the level of significance or coverage to meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG. Boleyn (talk) 15:15, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:45, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support deletion. The main mentions of him are on Wikipedia mirror sites. There are no articles about him. Yuchitown (talk) 16:35, 15 August 2021 (UTC)Yuchitown[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colorado-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:51, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I found and added to the article five reviews of three of his books, so there's a case for WP:AUTHOR. However, three of them are in the same journal as each other, so they're not as independent as they might be. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:13, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Wyoming-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 12:01, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. per David Eppstein, fails WP:NPROF but should be enough for WP:NAUTHOR. --hroest 17:48, 17 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 11:12, 18 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, passes NAUTHOR, albeit barely.Jackattack1597 (talk) 12:00, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: All the keep supports are expressed weakly and without conviction. Some more input would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:09, 22 August 2021 (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.