Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Constantino Mendieta


 * 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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Constantino Mendieta

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Advertising for a plastic surgeon. His book is in only 6 libraries, so he's not a notable author. His scientific publications have citations of only 48, 34, 22, 22, 16, 16, 4...., which is trivial in clinical medicine. Appearing as one of a number of other surgeons on a video show is not notability, the refs are PR, as usual. The promotional nature of the article is apparent even from the photo.  DGG ( talk ) 19:16, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:45, 18 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Searches particularly found only passing mentions at News, Books and Highbeam. SwisterTwister   talk  21:00, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep (I created the article, and have disclosed the paid contribution on the article's talk page): He is a subject of public interest in the field of plastic surgery, with articles about his work in Vice magazine, New York Times, New York magazine, The Daily Mail and New York Daily News, quotes in NBC News, was named one of the best beauty surgeons in the US by Harper's Bazaar, was one of five plastic surgeons on the Bravo documentary Miami Slice, etc. His book is ranked #62 in plastic and cosmetic surgery on Amazon, which is pretty good. He is a plastic surgeon with a high profile, with press (more than mere "passing mentions") demonstrating his notability.--Bernie44 (talk) 23:12, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Possibly a redirect from his name to buttock augmentation, since that seems to be the topic of the NYT article.  DGG ( talk ) 06:27, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete - searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage to show they meet WP:GNG. As DGG as pointed out, they don't pass any of the more focused notability criteria, either.  Onel 5969  TT me 19:20, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  20:38, 25 December 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete Basically, this person is famous for being famous. I don't think he can be considered notable as a surgeon because he has written very little of medical import. His area of expertise is ripe for salacious exploitation. (One article calls him "is the biggest advocate for butt augmentation in the world", and others make even more raunchy statements about him). He appears to be quite good at self promotion, and one article I found indicated that he contacted the reporter when he heard that his particular plastic surgery fad was being investigated, and made sure that his point of view was covered. Like fad diets, fad surgery gets attention, but WP articles should not attempt to justify the practice. The sources here are weak (Vice, Daily News, Jamaica Observer) and many are only mentions. None can be considered to be medically important. The only reliable sources (NYTimes, etc.) have only mentions of him. This is a beefed-up overly promotional article. LaMona (talk) 17:38, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep Mendieta is clearly the authority, at least as far as the public is concerned, concerning his particular niche in the plastic surgery world. There is more or less consistent coverage of him over the course of several years. As far as sources are concerned, Vice is not necessarily serious in tone at all times, but it is a relatively respected news source. I seems like he does, in fact, merit an article.--MainlyTwelve (talk) 02:42, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — UY Scuti Talk  19:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Really, per DGG. Incidental tabloidy mentions don't add up to notability. Drmies (talk) 01:31, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Yeah not enough specific coverage to guarantee an article.  → Call me  Razr   Nation  10:10, 8 January 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.