Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diosdado González Marrero


 * 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   keep. Tone 10:23, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Diosdado González Marrero

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Notability tied to just one event. Damiens .rf 15:25, 23 October 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Coffee //  have a cup  //  ark  // 21:18, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BLP1E.  Grsz 11  15:45, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Black Spring (Cuba) as a plausable search term.  Lugnuts  (talk) 09:40, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Every individual included in Amnesty International's list demonstrates continuing international coverage, and usually for significant things. Their descriptions always provide enough information to write an article--which could be fuller than the present one.  This is not a matter of the sort of tabloid event intended by BLP 1E.   DGG ( talk ) 02:33, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per DGG's analysis. The fact that a large group of individuals is associated with a particular event does not mean that is the only event relating to ther notability, and prisoners of conscience, especially those recognized by Amnesty International, typically have generated significant nontrivial coverage for their activities. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 17:55, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep per DGG/HW. Hobit (talk) 05:37, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep DGG explains that every individual included in Amnesty International's list demonstrates continuing international coverage, and usually for significant things. Their descriptions always provide enough information to write an article--which could be fuller than the present one. This is not a matter of the sort of tabloid event intended by BLP. . . I agree. - Ret.Prof (talk) 11:48, 4 November 2009 (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.