Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Javier Ávila


 * 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. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 21:23, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Javier Ávila

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Meets neither WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMIC (the nice citation counts are not for this person). Oh yeah, the whole WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY thing.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:12, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. TJMSmith (talk) 13:32, 31 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete. Not notable. Mercy11 (talk) 04:19, 2 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Don't delete. Give the page creators a second chance.Friebfuddhicecoffee (talk) 14:44, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Confirmed sock of . As there is no duplicate vote with any of their other accounts and they were not blocked at the time of making their !vote, this will remain unstruck. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 15:24, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment, leaning Keep. Not sure why WP:PROF is the most relevant guideline; but might possibly meet #4. However, the subject seems likely to meet WP:AUTHOR. One of his novels has been made into a film (#3). Needs reviews of his works adding; would make the subject's notability clear. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:25, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, on the (unproven) assumption that the subject is notable as an author, blocking the editor for imitating a real person, then preventing account creation per COI (contradictory?), then immediately nominating the article for deletion by several routes, strikes me as unfortunate. The 'pedia is trying to generate more diversity in its contents & contributors, yet people who try to write articles to address that (possibly about themselves) face close to insuperable barriers to successful participation. Espresso Addict (talk) 05:35, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment Subject may or may not be notable, but they've willfully complicated the article through persistent promotion, then creating multiple socks to evade a block, and denying it when confronted. If notability rests on a razor's edge, the user's behavior is a deciding factor. The barriers are, hopefully, designed to discourage blatant WP:COI editing, not good faith contributions. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 17:42, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 19:12, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Kolma8 (talk) 21:10, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete COI issues due to being an autobiography, also does not meet WP:NBIO. MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 03:17, 11 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.