Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guillermo Bermúdez


 * 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 speedy keep. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) 4meter4 (talk) 12:52, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Guillermo Bermúdez

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Essentially an unverified article as the only source given is a dead link. Not clear if the subject meets WP:NACADEMIC or WP:NARCHITECT or WP:SIGCOV. 4meter4 (talk) 15:40, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Colombia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:47, 6 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete the sourcing clearly does not meet GNG. To justify having an article on an architect, we should have specific mentions of some of the subjects significant works.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:59, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. I fixed the dead link using InternetArchiveBot, and I looked at the corresponding article in the Spanish Wikipedia at es:Guillermo Bermúdez. I added some references: books and a catalogue of an exhibition, all published many years after his death. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 20:07, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep After looking through the sources that have been added, I believe the subject is notable. An entire book has been written about his work (La construcción de la intimidad: casas de Guillermo Bermúdez Umaña 1952-1971). This, combined with the obituary in the Colombian newspaper El Tiempo, demonstrates that he meets WP:GNG. Modussiccandi (talk) 19:51, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Two books and two journal articles, all specifically about his work and used as references in the article, together with a major newspaper obituary, make a clear and obvious case for WP:GNG. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:31, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment. Thank you everyone, particularly Eastmain, for finding these sources and updating the article. It's clear he passes WP:SIGCOV. Withdrawing shortly.4meter4 (talk) 12:50, 8 August 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.