Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pedro Rodríguez (politician)

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. (non-admin closure) Dusti ^{*Let's talk!*} 07:13, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pedro Rodríguez (politician)[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)

Sources not exist at all IRIEN✓ (aka MAh'ia)🙏 17:39, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. IRIEN✓ (aka MAh'ia)🙏 17:39, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:57, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about district level politician as well.Not Notable.IRIEN✓ (aka MAh'ia)🙏 18:23, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Easy keep. Nominator depressingly did not follow WP:BEFORE. Member of the first Philippine Assembly, the forerunner of the current Philippine House of Representatives, which is a national legislature. The Philippine Assembly was the first fully elected national assembly of its kind in Asia outside Japan. Easily satisfies WP:POLITICIAN. To the nominator, please exercise in satisfying WP:BEFORE nominating articles such as this. Howard the Duck (talk) 20:25, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Definitely passes WP:POLITICIAN since he was a part of the legislature. --Hiwilms (talk) 05:34, 19 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sources not exist at all, Find some reliable sources. --MA Javadi (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Yes, the article needs improvement, but as long as it's verifiable that they actually held the claimed role and aren't an outright hoax, politicians who held seats in national legislatures are always automatically notable regardless of the quality of sourcing present in the article as written. For a person who held an NPOL-passing office 110 years ago, the sources are not all that likely to be readily Googlable — but there are definitely books and archived newspaper coverage somewhere. Our references do not have to be web-accessible; we are allowed to cite print-only content. Wikipedia editors don't always put in the work to locate archival sourcing that they can't just find on a simple Google search, so our articles on older politicians who held office before the age of the internet are often much more inadequate than our articles on contemporary officeholders — but as long as we can verify that the person actually held the claimed role, we keep the article and flag it for reference improvement. Bearcat (talk) 17:10, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Obviously notable and finding a source to verify that he held office was not at all difficult. -- Whpq (talk) 03:12, 23 May 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.