Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francisco Mercado Jr.


 * 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. Arguing about heroics can't overcome WP:NSOLDIER, which, like it or not, is the accepted standard for military personnel. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 01:21, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Francisco Mercado Jr.

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Utterly fails WP:NSOLDIER. Lettlerhello • contribs 04:04, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettlerhello • contribs 04:04, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettlerhello • contribs 04:04, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Lettlerhello • contribs 04:04, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Lettlerhello • contribs 04:04, 8 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG, nothing notable about parachuting from a plane in WWII. Mztourist (talk) 04:48, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - This aviator was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, a military award and decoration of the United States Armed Forces. This medal was awarded to any person who, after April 6, 1917, while serving in any capacity with the U.S. Air Force, distinguished himself by single acts of heroism or extraordinary achievement while participating in aerial flight. Both heroism and extraordinary achievement are entirely distinctive, involving operations that are not routine. Tony the Marine (talk) 04:58, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The Distinguished Flying Cross (United States) doesn't come close to satisfying #1 of WP:SOLDIER, it ranks 6th in order of precedence. Mztourist (talk) 05:17, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * He literally was awarded a medal that had thousands of recipients for WW2 alone. He also parachuted out of a plane. Very notable. Lettlerhello • contribs 14:05, 8 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete as explained above, the award he received is not even close to being one that grants a recipient notability, and there is no other sign of notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:53, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - It totally wrong that a soldier must be awarded more then one Distinguished Flying Cross to be notable. Who came up with that idea? The soldier was a hero and as such that makes him notable. Tony the Marine (talk) 19:10, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment There is related discussion about this nomination here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Marine_69-71#Nomination_of_Jorge_Otero_Barreto_for_deletion Mercy11 (talk) 22:23, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - The person who invented the criteria that to become notable a hero needs to be "awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour (such as the Navy Cross) multiple times" wasn't thinking right. Many of those who were awarded the second highest military decoration have later been awarded the Medal of Honor. The only difference being the name of the award, not the actions which made the person notable. Another thing, being the "first" to do X of any race or ethnicity, which in this case you specifically named in my "talk" page "Puerto Rican/Hispanic", makes that person notable and should not be omitted from this encyclopedia, as all to often has happened in our history books. Tony the Marine (talk) 02:47, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Read WP:SOLDIER and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history/Archive_90. "The soldier was a hero and as such that makes him notable" is entirely the sort of argument that WP:SOLDIER sought to address. If someone is later awarded the Medal of Honor then a page can be created for them then, but that is irrelevant here as Mercado Jr.'s DFC would never be upgraded to an MoH. Mztourist (talk) 03:33, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Please assume good faith and avoid personal attacks. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:20, 11 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The first link is to an essay and the second link is to opinions and not to Wikipedias policy. Tony the Marine (talk) 05:32, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete The award of a single Distinguished Flying Cross (United States) is not enough to establish notability. The DFC is fairly low in precedence, falling under the Legion of Merit. In addition, this article was primarily written by the subject's son, which may possibly bring up conflict of interest issues. While the son is quite understandably proud of his father, I don't believe this article establishes sufficient evidence for it to be included in Wikipedia. Roam41 (talk) 23:20, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, no doubt a hero but as per previous comments DFC not sufficiently notable to qualify and I'm not seeing much in the literature. I note that some sources are primary and for at least two others, "The Hard Luck 492nd" and "Misburg" he isn't even mentioned. Zawed (talk) 22:31, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

The relevant information below comes from the WP page here


 * I view this and the above AfD's as a sudden agenda of personal attacks on the articles which are about "Hispanic" war heroes. This never happened before and what is cited as a reason for the nominations is an essay not policy. Tony the Marine (talk) 12:44, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You have created a number of pages about people who do not satisfy WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG and therefore are not notable. Being the first Puerto Rican/Hispanic to do X does not establish notability. That's why these pages are being put up for deletion. Mztourist (talk) 15:07, 9 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Really? So it is about the pages that I created and not what others have created? Let me tell you the person who invented the criteria that to become notable a hero needs to be "awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour (such as the Navy Cross) multiple times" wasn't thinking right. Many of those who were awarded the second highest military decoration have later been awarded the Medal of Honor. The only difference being the name of the award, not the actions which made the person notable. Another thing, being the "first" to do X of any race or ethnicity, in this case you specifically name "Puerto Rican/Hispanic", makes that person notable and should not be omitted from this encyclopedia, as all to often has happened in our history books. I ask myself, what is the use of continuing in this project when after so many years the articles which have been created with hard work following the guidelines come under attack and are nominated for deletion? Tony the Marine (talk) 17:42, 9 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I agree with Tony. Unless this is an approved decision to remove every 'minor' American hero regardless of background from the encyclopedia then it should not begin with minority Americans. They are underrepresented in American history as it is. Let them be the last to be removed if at all.Dmercado (talk) 21:03, 9 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Read WP:SOLDIER and Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history/Archive_90. While WP:SOLDIER is just an Essay it sets out presumptions as to military notability, which if the person has SIGCOV in multiple RS means that they deserve a page. "The soldier was a hero and as such that makes him notable" is entirely the sort of argument that WP:SOLDIER sought to address. If someone is later awarded the Medal of Honor then a page can be created for them then. GNG applies to everyone regardless of nationality and User:Marine 69-71 as an Admin should know that. Mztourist (talk) 03:37, 10 January 2021 (UTC)


 * The first link is to an essay and the second link is to opinions and not to Wikipedias policy. Tony the Marine (talk) 05:32, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Its a consensus, you are welcome to try to argue it at AFD or elsewhere.Mztourist (talk) 06:57, 10 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment - User:Letter and User:Mztourist seem to be supporting each other's delete nominations: one nominating the article for delete and the other user quickly agreeing to its deletion. I'll explain, (from what I've spotchecked) when User:Letter nominates the soldier article for deletion, Mztourist agrees on delete and vice versa. To nomination closer: If anything, remember that the delete is not a "count" vote. The two users agreeing on all deletion of specific soldier article nominations seems strange to me. --The Eloquent Peasant (talk) 20:22, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Exactly, I have been accused of "canvassing" when it seems as if the two users mentioned have teamed up to eliminate articles about our heroes only because according to an essay they were not notable for being awarded one of the second highest military decoration of the United States. Instead it should be taken into account that the heroic actions that they made would in another case merit the Medal of Honor. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:42, 10 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment. A nomination using the WP:NSOLDIER essay as a delete criteria? Since when do we make delete decisions based on an WP:SPS as non-notable as a WP essay? What is a WP essay if it isn't a piece of writing expressing an editor's personal POV with no oversight by a notable editorial board of SMEs nor peer-reviewed by experts qualified in the branch on knowledge in question? I frown upon arguments made based on WP essays as if they were anything more than someone's desperate attempt to make his/her views known at WP after failing to get his/her ideas approved by the community at large and after failing to get those ideas into one of WP's WP:PG. Mercy11 (talk) 01:33, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You should familiarize yourself with the criteria used in assessing Military-related deletion discussions. Mztourist (talk) 03:50, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The demonstrated lack of understanding at what "SPS" - and notability - even means is also very disturbing, as is the bad faith being assumed, the aspersions being cast and the lack of understanding of how supplemental notability guidelines even work (just for the record they're neither "an editor's personal POV" or "someone's desperate attempt"). - The Bushranger One ping only 07:18, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
 * rather than insulting editors' intelligence or reading ability, you should have already stepped aside and allow the nomination to run its course rather than jumping in everytime an editor makes a comment you don't like. Mercy11 (talk) 00:02, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Your comment was both wildly assuming bad faith and uncivil, in addition to being, quite frankly, wrong in nearly every respect, including what can only be seen as fundamental misconceptions about core Wikipedia policies. Accordingly their response was justified. The fact you chose to respond with a unambiguous personal attack speaks volumes. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:37, 17 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for taking sides ("their response was justified"), administrator. That's just what we needed. The complaints department is at WP:ANI and you can make your case there. Mercy11 (talk) 03:53, 18 January 2021 (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.