Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jacques Montemoiño

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--Ymblanter (talk) 19:02, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Jacques Montemoiño[edit]

(Find video game sources: "Jacques Montemoiño" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk)

I believe it is not notable per the Wikipedia policy WP:BIO. This article appears to have been created due to the assertion that the person is a notable computer games developer. He does appear to be a games developer, it just I can't find any sources to show he is a notable one to include in Wikipedia. Seaweed (talk) 12:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. czar · · 16:14, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. czar · · 16:14, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game-related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) czar · · 03:30, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - reads more like a feel-good article from the local newspaper than a encyclopedia article. --72.28.136.205 (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 14:19, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No indications of notability. Wikipedia is not a social networking site. - Jorgath (talk) ^(contribs) 23:18, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - His profession is irrelevant at this point. It does not matter if he is a gamer, a YouTube sensation, or running for president. He fails WP:GNG based on no WP:SIGCOV from WP:RS. The only thing remotely close would be an interview with Blog Talk Radio, but even that falls short of a RS. --FoolMeOnce2Times (talk) 19:04, 9 May 2013 (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.