Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Felix Velarde (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 14:44, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

Felix Velarde
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has gone through various stages of editing and there seem to have been several requests for deletion. You can find a list of sources on the talk pag, and whilst some seem to be reliable, I'm not sure about general notability. To deal with all the calls for deletion / modification in the past, I thought raising it here would be a viable next step. Hope my assessment is correct (doing some research I couldn't turn up any notable sources etc..). Ruhri Jörg  16:50, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:51, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment: Only now did I find the previous deletion discussion (2017). Don't know why / how I missed that in the first place. Reading through the discussion I'm still torn, though. If previous consensus is deciding, though, please feel free to withdraw this nomination (not entirely sure how to do that and don't want to mess something up). Let me know what you think. -- Ruhri Jörg  16:57, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It's your decision to withdraw or not, based upon what you think about the sources. Decide what your own opinion is on how deletion policy should apply.  I am happy to do the gnoming for you if you decide to withdraw, as I am sure would be several non-administrator closers.  See also Project:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. Uncle G (talk) 18:53, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Since another editor is "leaning delete", it is probably best to keep the discussion open, now. Uncle G (talk) 20:25, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'd say the previous one only stayed because of lack of actual opinionation. "Plenty of references" on that one seems to have meant "plenty of bad references" - David Gerard (talk) 19:48, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Leaning delete - I am quite unconvinced of notability - David Gerard (talk) 19:48, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Here's Fences&amp;Windows' list, excluding the ones by the subject rather than about the subject. Which sources are bad and why?
 * Uncle G (talk) 20:24, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete a non-notable businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:04, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Apparent comment from subject : "I have never paid anyone to do anything here. Some updates were done a few years ago by an ex-colleague after we stopped working together and (I thought) had lost contact. I'd rather you took down the page than had anything up that suggests in any way I'm unethical, thanks." - David Gerard (talk) 13:06, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep I was eventually convinced by the last Afd after trying to delete it. He had a web design agency in 1994. It wasn't called that then of course, really a guy who knew html, but it was very early, really early. I was reading Computing every week and there was very very few folk or groups that you could point at. Lots of talk and hype but not much else. That is the reason the BBC decided to do a skit on him and only him. That is the definition of notable.  scope_creep Talk  18:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Those churnalism references which at the time I thought were rank, on a time period they range from 1998 to 2015. A long time to be visible as a public actor. Notable as well.  scope_creep Talk  18:41, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Uncle G (talk) 20:24, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete a non-notable businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:04, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Apparent comment from subject : "I have never paid anyone to do anything here. Some updates were done a few years ago by an ex-colleague after we stopped working together and (I thought) had lost contact. I'd rather you took down the page than had anything up that suggests in any way I'm unethical, thanks." - David Gerard (talk) 13:06, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep I was eventually convinced by the last Afd after trying to delete it. He had a web design agency in 1994. It wasn't called that then of course, really a guy who knew html, but it was very early, really early. I was reading Computing every week and there was very very few folk or groups that you could point at. Lots of talk and hype but not much else. That is the reason the BBC decided to do a skit on him and only him. That is the definition of notable.  scope_creep Talk  18:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Those churnalism references which at the time I thought were rank, on a time period they range from 1998 to 2015. A long time to be visible as a public actor. Notable as well.  scope_creep Talk  18:41, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Uncle G (talk) 20:24, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete a non-notable businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:04, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Apparent comment from subject : "I have never paid anyone to do anything here. Some updates were done a few years ago by an ex-colleague after we stopped working together and (I thought) had lost contact. I'd rather you took down the page than had anything up that suggests in any way I'm unethical, thanks." - David Gerard (talk) 13:06, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep I was eventually convinced by the last Afd after trying to delete it. He had a web design agency in 1994. It wasn't called that then of course, really a guy who knew html, but it was very early, really early. I was reading Computing every week and there was very very few folk or groups that you could point at. Lots of talk and hype but not much else. That is the reason the BBC decided to do a skit on him and only him. That is the definition of notable.  scope_creep Talk  18:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Those churnalism references which at the time I thought were rank, on a time period they range from 1998 to 2015. A long time to be visible as a public actor. Notable as well.  scope_creep Talk  18:41, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep I was eventually convinced by the last Afd after trying to delete it. He had a web design agency in 1994. It wasn't called that then of course, really a guy who knew html, but it was very early, really early. I was reading Computing every week and there was very very few folk or groups that you could point at. Lots of talk and hype but not much else. That is the reason the BBC decided to do a skit on him and only him. That is the definition of notable.  scope_creep Talk  18:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Those churnalism references which at the time I thought were rank, on a time period they range from 1998 to 2015. A long time to be visible as a public actor. Notable as well.  scope_creep Talk  18:41, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 09:32, 16 August 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete per WP:SIGCOV - he's done stuff, but there's no sources to confirm who he is. Bearian (talk) 18:49, 22 August 2019 (UTC) This is the closest we have. Bearian (talk) 18:52, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 18:06, 24 August 2019 (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.