Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fran Villalba Segarra


 * 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 13:35, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Fran Villalba Segarra

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

BLP of a college student who has written some blog articles. Does not appear to meet notability standards. &#9790;Loriendrew&#9789;  &#9743;(ring-ring)  21:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:GNG and even WP:V, as third party reliable sources seem to be basically nonexistent. The only sources that seem to exist are those written by the subject or places he's worked at/published for and the likes of blog posts.  Hut 8.5  21:54, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep: I included the article in Wikipedia because, after reading the notability standards, I believe it would be a good idea to create a Wikipedia page for this person. At his young age he has been published scientific articles about aging in recognizable magazines and also plays a very important role in Hostinger, the biggest free web hosting provider if I am not wrong. I believe his page was deleted before because the references provided were not reputable enough, but after deliveration with the admin, the page met with the notability standards and it was agreed to reupload the page once better sources to prove the information could be provided. The current links to those scientific articles he published are from totally independent magazines. Levante TV is the biggest local Valencian TV Channel, where they interviewed the subject. Just seen a similar page, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran_Villalba I objectively do not think he meets the notability standards more than what https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran_Villalba_Segarra does. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsgsf343 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 2 June 2016‎


 * These are the sources currently cited by the article:
 * : very brief profile of the subject hosted by an organisation he wrote an article for once, likely provided by the subject and so not an independent source.
 * : piece of advertising from a company the subject works for which briefly mentions him. Not independent of the subject and not significant coverage even if it was.
 * : I can't get this to load but I seriously doubt that a short interview on local TV news which may be largely about the company he works for would not demonstrate notability.
 * and : same article written by the subject published in two different places. Not coverage of the subject and doesn't confer notability.
 * : brief profile of the subject as part of some youth business competition he entered. Even if it wasn't written by him it isn't significant coverage.
 * Having a management role in a company we don't even have an article on isn't going to confer notability either.
 * So no, I don't agree that the available sources indicate notability. While comparisons with other articles which exist don't make great arguments here, Fran Villalba has played for one of the most successful football teams in Europe and that alone would make him sufficiently notable to have an article here.  Hut 8.5  23:41, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

This article does meet with the WP:GNG and WP:V. I think the user above clarified the reliability of the sources - I do not think we can question those. On the other hand, if we check the average page notability in Wikipedia and the notability rules, we can see that the subject does surpass both. — 78.92.88.214 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 18:19, 2 June 2016 (UTC).

Unless this discussion opens again, it is concluded that this article does not qualify for deletion. — 145.90.65.112 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 15:51, 4 June 2016‎ (UTC).
 * Delete, Unrelible sources per above. KGirlTrucker87talk what I'm been doing 21:08, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

About Fran Villalba and Fran Villalba Segarra. Do you honestly believe that it's more notable a guy who played a few minutes for Valencia, than a guy who has two baccalaureates, is studying in the 4th best business University in Europe and plays a key role in the biggest free web hosting provider, both at a young age? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gsgsf343 (talk • contribs) 07:27, 5 June 2016 (UTC) — Duplicate vote: Gsgsf343 (talk • contribs)  has already cast a vote above.
 * Keep: Talking about the sources:
 * The Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies is an independent source
 * ComputerHoy is one of the biggest tech magazines in Spain, which is used to prove that Fran has a role at HostMania
 * A TV interview about Fran and HostMania in the biggest Valencian TV channel does demostrate notability in my opinion
 * The two articles written by the subject demostrate he is currently intaking research into aging and immortality.
 * Made of Talent was one of the biggest youth business competition in Spain, backed by ClearChannel.
 * The IEET source is a one paragraph profile to accompany an article the subject wrote for them. It isn't significant coverage and I think it's highly likely that they asked the subject what they should put there. The Computerhoy piece is clearly advertising - it has a line at the bottom which says something like "computerhoy for hostmania" indicating that the company had something to do with writing or publishing it and the wording is blatantly promotional. Writing articles does not demonstrate notability, nor does entering competitions. The TV interview is better but an interview on local news is not much to base an article on.  Hut 8.5  21:28, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Added reference to Tendencias21.net — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.90.65.112 (talk) 10:18, 6 June 2016 (UTC) Added reference to infolibre.es, one of the biggest Spanish newspapers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.90.65.112 (talk) 19:51, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete none of the sources come anywhere close to establishing notability. He may one day be notable, but is no where near such at present.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:48, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep: Why aren't the sources notable? Please refer to the explanation above on why they are. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.90.65.112 (talk) 07:32, 6 June 2016 (UTC)  — 145.90.65.112 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete as there's still by far nothing actually convincing for any GNG or otherwise applicable notability, only shows expected information including of what would be found at his own website. SwisterTwister   talk  06:32, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Many of the sources cited are short, promotional profiles produced by organizations this individual is affiliated with. Writing articles alone is not a shortcut to notability - it isn't an independent source, for one. Press releases, brief mentions, etc. are insufficient to meet GNG, and Hut 8.5 is correct here that even the non-promotional coverage is highly scant. GABgab 14:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:TOOSOON. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:50, 10 June 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.