Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jaume Cañellas Galindo (3rd 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. On all three AfD's there is a severe influx of SPA's who ask to keep this article. Combined with the previous two AfD's there is a very strong consensus to delete. To prevent further wasting of the communities time, I'm salting the entry Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 18:31, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Jaume Cañellas Galindo
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Recreation of page preivously deleted after two sockpuppet-infested debates (in which I and other editors were accused of being "Catalan separatists", whatever that's got to do with anything -- take a look if you're interested).

Subject is a psychiatrist who's (1) been director of a local clinic; (2) testified (along with two others) at a murder trial; (3) reported a violation in abortion procedures which led to a scandal; (4) been agitating for some years to get Spain to recognize child psychiatry as a specialty. On (1) his photo and some short quotes appeared in two local puff pieces. On (2) he is mentioned in passing in a story on the trial. On (3) he is mentioned as the person who made the complaint, and his affiliation with the hospital under investigation is explained. On (4) he was quoted as spokesman at some kind of protest by parents, plus he's one of a score of signatories on a petition, and he's written some advocacy pieces. Oh yes... (5) he's also an "Ambassador" for Save the Children, which we know via jpgs (posted by the subject himself to his own blogpage) of an ID card with his photo, and a certificate of appreciation identical to one my mother received when she donated $100.

Items (2) and (3) aren't even mentioned in the article, for some reason -- I did a real review of the sources, you see -- but in any event all of this added up falls far short of notability. He's a hardworking crusader for kids who's no doubt fighting the good fight, but unfortunately withut anyone taking much notice, it seems. EEng (talk) 02:21, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete and salt. Cañellas Galindo does have some notability, but not nearly enough to pass the strict WP:BIO guidelines here on Wikipedia. Of the sources given, only a few are actually usable in any context and even then they'd pretty much only be able to be used as trivial sources. The rest of the sources aren't usable, such as the brief name drops and the primary sources. It's pretty obvious that if this page is deleted it'll be re-added by one of the same people who have been sockpuppeting in the previous AfDs, so I think this needs to be salted.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:56, 23 February 2012 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:50, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:50, 23 February 2012 (UTC)


 * keep. Demonstrated notability and references.--Spmdcp (talk) 16:48, 24 February 2012 (UTC) — Spmdcp (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Noting obvious SPA/sockpuppet. -- Kinu  t/c 19:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * keep. The character is notable. Sources verified and authenticated references. Should be maintained and protected from systematic attacks because it is a living person and a remarkable professional.--46.253.38.94 (talk) 17:02, 24 February 2012 (UTC) — 46.253.38.94 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Noting obvious SPA/sockpuppet. -- Kinu  t/c 19:16, 24 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Strong delete and salt per the reasons laid out by the nominator and at the previous AfD discussion. The references are rife with primary sources, and those that might pass muster as extremely weak WP:RS are cursory mentions that do nothing to satisfy WP:GNG. The strawman and WP:VAGUEWAVE arguments here obviously do not establish notability either. -- Kinu  t/c 20:23, 24 February 2012 (UTC)
 * delete: nothing new since last nomination (in which the article was deleted, by the way). --Xtv - (my talk) - (que dius que què?) 15:59, 25 February 2012 (UTC)
 * keep.Remarkable character with obvious neutral and verifiable references. MRCaa (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2012 (UTC) — Marcamp (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Noting obvious SPA/sockpuppet. -- Kinu  t/c 22:40, 25 February 2012 (UTC)


 * keep After do some research found many resources with information about the contribution of this well known professional in his field. Links need a rework deletion is excessive. --Dataslow (talk) 12:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC) — Dataslow (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Noting obvious SPA/sockpuppet. -- Kinu  t/c 20:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Strong keep Looking at and references, this character is a notable and verified professional who deserve to be in wikipedia, pioneer on child and adolescent psychiatry in Spain. --LG (talk) 17:12, 26 February 2012 (UTC) — LuisGracias (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Noting obvious SPA/sockpuppet. -- Kinu  t/c 20:10, 26 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: I have semi-protected the article due to repeated addition of the same "sources" (read: scanned documents previously uploaded to Imageshack and now some random DropBox account... really?) by the socks. -- Kinu  t/c 22:20, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt per Tokyogirl. Enough already. --MelanieN (talk) 23:22, 29 February 2012 (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.