Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Chavez Moran


 * 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   no consensus. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:27, 4 August 2013 (UTC)

Daniel Chavez Moran

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:BASIC. Promotional article largely written by the subject's PR. Source 1 is ok (appearance on a top 100 list) but not enough on its own. Source 2 does not mention the subject. Source 3 is a blog of a press release. Sources 4 and 5 are self-published. Logical Cowboy (talk) 16:51, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Meets the guidelines of WP:ANYBIO. CNN's list of "The Most Important People in Mexico" included subject for two consecutive years: 2009 and 2010. Edyang (talk) 23:15, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment: The above editor has a rather large COI on this subject, which he has not disclosed here. Logical Cowboy (talk) 23:28, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I did not originally create this article, rather just added in information to bring it up to date and improve its accuracy. Based on Logical Cowboy's feedback, I removed links and sections while adding in two references from Forbes.com and Milenio.com. Regardless, it is hard to deny that Mr. Moran is a subject of importance based on these references. Will continue to clean up the article based on feedback or allow other editors to do so if COI prevents me.Edyang (talk) 07:27, 10 July 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nathan2055talk - contribs 21:44, 16 July 2013 (UTC)




 * Weak delete - there is some coverage, but I'm not sure it rises the level expected for a BLP. Much of the article's content is completely unsourced because the subject simply hasn't received enough coverage for things like his higher education to be verifiable. Some of the sources themselves are a bit weak too - I'm not sure that a very short profile in a list of "The most powerful investors in tourism" counts for much. It's coverage, but probably not "significant coverage". I'd probably need to see one more solid source to get me over the line. The paid editing conflict of interest is obviously a concern too and it probably doesn't help that we've had a lot of that here lately. I remain open to being convinced, but at the moment... Stalwart 111  23:22, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone  01:17, 26 July 2013 (UTC)




 * Appreciate Stalwart111's input, and I would submit for consideration that the fact he is mentioned in Forbes, CNN and Milenio (a major daily newspaper in Mexico) is sufficient proof of his significance. Also added a reference from the major daily newspaper in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico.Edyang (talk) 23:29, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The key here is "significant coverage". The Forbes source link is broken (and I couldn't find a working link to that article) and the CNN listing certainly wouldn't be considered "significant coverage". Being "mentioned" in papers doesn't count for much. Stalwart 111  00:51, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
 * The Forbes link is working for me: http://www.forbes.com.mx/sites/los-inversionistas-mas-poderosos-en-turismo/. That must count as significant coverage as the title of that article is "The Most Powerful Investors in Tourism" when translated to English. Shouldn't it count for something when you make a shortlist of Forbes as the most powerful anything in any industry?Edyang (talk) 22:53, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Edyang, it must be very difficult for you to judge whether it is significant coverage, given your close COI relation to the subject of this article. In the Forbes piece, Chavez is listed eighth, and the paragraph describing his activities is all of 82 words.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:40, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the link is working now like it was originally. As above, in my original comment, that article is probably one of the only ones with coverage and I'm still not sure it's "significant coverage". Maybe. It certainly "counts for something", sure, but on its own it probably isn't enough because we still need coverage in multiple sources. I'm probably still where I was, tough others may disagree. Stalwart 111  01:49, 1 August 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.