Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrés de Fuensalida


 * 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:51, 19 March 2016 (UTC)

Andrés de Fuensalida

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Almost no coverage, fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG. Almost no claim to any significance here either. Joseph2302 (talk) 22:14, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  23:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions.  /wiae   /tlk  23:29, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment -- It is always difficult to judge the merit of an article when there is only a stub. The sources cited seem to be purely genealogical ones: one on the founding families of Chile; the other on the Fuensalida family.  If we were dealing with US history, we would not regard the fact that a person was on the Mayflower voyage as providing notability.  If he was merely one of the small army that conquered Peru, etc, I would say he was NN.  However, if an account of what he did can be provided or he was an officer leading a conquistador force, I would say keep.  At present there is not enough to say anything.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:26, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment -- The subject's name seems more usually to be spelled as Andrés de Fuenzalida - . However, most of what I then get on a search is addresses in a street in Santiago de Chile that is presumably named after him, and most of the rest is snippets at best. Enough to suggest that there might well be some reliable sources somewhere - not enough for me to locate any of them. PWilkinson (talk) 22:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:12, 1 March 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * delete WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Created by an editor doing a family geneaology per their disclosure and building that up in WP, including creating a category for their family. See Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard. That is not what WP is for. (do we need a new WP:NOTFAMILYTREE part of WP:NOT?)  Jytdog (talk) 02:13, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  19:53, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, the article does not even claim a reason for notability. --Reinoutr (talk) 10:46, 19 March 2016 (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.