Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucio Fernandez

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. Drmies (talk) 01:44, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Lucio Fernandez[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 local politician, does not pass WP:NPOL nor does he pass WP:ENT as the awards he has won are not notable. Coverage is limited to local sources. Rusf10 (talk) 19:37, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 22:21, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 22:21, 31 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The subject has received significant press coverage, as indicated by the 41 citations of secondary, reliable sources in the article, which means that he meets both WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. Nightscream (talk) 00:04, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

All politicians receive local press coverage. 41 citations from local newspapers doesn't really mean much.--Rusf10 (talk) 02:21, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Entertainer, artist, author, singer, actor, dancer, playwright, screenwriter, producer and film director.Djflem (talk) 09:45, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not notable for any of those things. We have a guideline, its WP:ENT--Rusf10 (talk) 14:20, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions. Enos733 (talk) 16:10, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Enos733 (talk) 16:10, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think the question here is whether the subject passes WP:ENT for their overall work and creative work. The subject has one notable nomination (going toward WP:ANYBIO) and has a nice profile in NJ.com from 2010. As a creative professional, the subject is the author of several plays. While I found several profiles of the subject in NJ and NY media organizations, I was not able to find anything that goes beyond local coverage. --Enos733 (talk) 16:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. GNG is not just counting up the footnotes and keeping anything that passes some arbitrary number: it also takes into account factors like the depth of coverage that each source represents, the geographic range of where the sources are coming from, and the context of what the sources are covering him for. Any local political figure, for example, is simply and routinely expected to be able to show some local media coverage — but local political figures are not all automatically accepted as notable, so showing the existence of some local media coverage is not a "get out of WP:NPOL free" card in and of itself. And local creatives are also pretty routinely expected to get some coverage in the local media too, so it takes more than just the expected local media coverage to get them over WP:CREATIVE too — some of the arts awards could be notability claims if the coverage of him in that context were going above and beyond the purely local, but none of them are so "inherently" notable as to guarantee him an article just because his local newspaper gave him some "local guy does stuff" human interest coverage. To be notable for either of those things, his reliable source coverage would have to expand considerably beyond just Union City/Hudson County (and I mean more considerably than just the other side of the Hudson River, to boot, so the two Broadway World cites aren't the magic ticket either.) But every single source here that's even attempting to go any further than spitting distance from Union City is a primary source or a blog. This may look like enough volume, but it isn't enough range or depth or context, to get a figure of "local to a single city" notability into an international encyclopedia. Bearcat (talk) 21:08, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In addition to the 40+ references in the article (just a couple include [1], [2] ), there are others not in the article that demonstrate WP:GNG including Cuban Top 10, Wall Street Journal. There are also many Spanish language sources for instance [3]. There are plenty of trashy articles of questionable notability, especially in the US state of New Jersey. This one isn't one of them.Jacona (talk) 12:22, 3 April 2019 (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.