Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrián Sosa Nuez


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:43, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Adrián Sosa Nuez

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No real indication of notability or reliable references, written with a clear COI Jac 16888  Talk 22:36, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * DeleteClear WP:COI, fails WP:N-- SKATER  T a l k 23:12, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:47, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:47, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil (speak to me) 05:32, 2 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Autobiographical article by a recent graduate sourced mainly to publishers, at least one of which appears to be a self-publishing house. No evidence found that the subject meets either WP:AUTHOR or WP:ACADEMIC criteria. AllyD (talk) 10:41, 2 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep not famous, but interesting spanish writer — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.121.25.38 (talk) 18:38, 3 November 2013 (UTC) — 95.121.25.38 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep A lot of internationals sources — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.38.53.100 (talk) 15:11, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Blogs, shop sites, self-publishing pages, nothing that is actually reliable as a references-- Jac 16888 Talk 17:52, 8 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Library of Congress, Google Books, Worldcat, Official national & internat. webs (three books)... enoughs sources, enough WP:N — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.148.234.82 (talk) 00:52, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. The sources in the article do not establish notability, and nothing better than these was found. --Michig (talk) 08:04, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * New sources addeds, you can look it. Is possible to buy (and to read) his books around the world. His first book is in international libraries, his second book is in all Spain and his third work is in Europe & North America (Canada even). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.148.234.82 (talk) 17:21, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The fact that you can buy his books does not make him notable, none of the sources you have added can be considered reliable-- Jac 16888 Talk 17:28, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * What's the minimum to consider an author how a writer with reliable sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.148.234.82 (talk) 17:44, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You need third party reliable sources that discuss the subject, not blogs, self-published releases and bookshops. Identifying reliable sources-- Jac 16888 Talk 17:47, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The article have third party reliable sources.(Library of Congress index on "Artabán, el cuarto rey mago", Google Books ,News pages,Neutral pages ,...) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.148.234.82 (talk) 18:00, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * LOC just proves he wrote a book, as does the Google books link, isladelecturas seems to be little more than a press release announcing a book and the fourth link just seems to be a list of places a book can be found-- Jac 16888 Talk 18:26, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * He has wrote three books. With the first aprove, he is a writer already. The others books can´t be in libraries until some time after published. The necessary prove to the other works is that it stay in bookshop with a EAN (lawful & registered). The article never must not be deleted, but if it would be impossible, the minimum must be merged here at "other version" section  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.148.234.82 (talk) 18:54, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You're not getting it, anybody can write a book and pay for it to be published - this does not make a person notable, similarly the fact he wrote about an actual notable book does not itself make his book or himself notable-- Jac 16888 Talk 19:06, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok. But is possible that these kind of books are in the Library of Congress? This kind of wiki publication could be interesting to the people, because is a XXI century version of an old book of Henry Van Dyke. Here WP:N no is the problem, the problem here is the culture — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.148.234.82 (talk) 19:20, 9 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Keep and add to the "other versiones" of henry van dyke — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.121.22.137 (talk) 15:48, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * KeepNot enough reasons to be deleted(but not to merge). Large coverage as author, too much to be unremarkable — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.44.171.5 (talk) 17:17, 10 November 2013 (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.