- 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. Consensus that there are insufficient reliable sources to demonstrate notability Nosebagbear ( talk) 16:20, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Lina Caceres
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Lina Caceres ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fluff article about a public speaker. The references are mostly are unreliable. This article is basically a CV. It fails WP:SIGCOV McMatter ( talk)/( contrib) 13:26, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. McMatter ( talk)/( contrib) 13:26, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:47, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:48, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:48, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Leaning delete: it really does read like a CV, and the problem is that most of the details in the text are unverifiable using reliable sources. Produ is basically a networking website for professionals in the communications industry: I'm not sure it counts as an RS, but even so, the first reference is just Ms. Caceres using it to publicise upcoming work by artists under her management. Alo is a Hello!-style glossy celebrities magazine, and the reference is a primary source interview, so that would fail independent coverage. The Hispanicize, Socialmediaweek and Worldforumdisrupt are identical press release biographies supplied by Ms. Caceres, and the last reference is an event listing for a university talk. I suppose you could argue that she passes criterion 1 of WP:CREATIVE, but with almost nothing in the way of independent reliable sources to support this assertion, this article would have to be cut down to a couple of lines of text. Even the infobox would have to be almost entirely deleted. because nowhere in the sources is there any mention of Ms. Caceres' full name, birth date, birth place or dual nationality, so this article has clearly been created by the subject or someone who works closely with her. Richard3120 ( talk) 15:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Richard3120 ( talk) 21:12, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
- Delete for lack of reliable sources and because it is just too much of a mess to fix. Bearian ( talk) 00:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC).
- 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.
- 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. Consensus that there are insufficient reliable sources to demonstrate notability Nosebagbear ( talk) 16:20, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
Lina Caceres
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Lina Caceres ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fluff article about a public speaker. The references are mostly are unreliable. This article is basically a CV. It fails WP:SIGCOV McMatter ( talk)/( contrib) 13:26, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. McMatter ( talk)/( contrib) 13:26, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:47, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:48, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:48, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Leaning delete: it really does read like a CV, and the problem is that most of the details in the text are unverifiable using reliable sources. Produ is basically a networking website for professionals in the communications industry: I'm not sure it counts as an RS, but even so, the first reference is just Ms. Caceres using it to publicise upcoming work by artists under her management. Alo is a Hello!-style glossy celebrities magazine, and the reference is a primary source interview, so that would fail independent coverage. The Hispanicize, Socialmediaweek and Worldforumdisrupt are identical press release biographies supplied by Ms. Caceres, and the last reference is an event listing for a university talk. I suppose you could argue that she passes criterion 1 of WP:CREATIVE, but with almost nothing in the way of independent reliable sources to support this assertion, this article would have to be cut down to a couple of lines of text. Even the infobox would have to be almost entirely deleted. because nowhere in the sources is there any mention of Ms. Caceres' full name, birth date, birth place or dual nationality, so this article has clearly been created by the subject or someone who works closely with her. Richard3120 ( talk) 15:01, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Richard3120 ( talk) 21:12, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
- Delete for lack of reliable sources and because it is just too much of a mess to fix. Bearian ( talk) 00:36, 7 November 2019 (UTC).
- 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.