Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jorge Enrique González Pacheco


 * 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. joe deckertalk 18:51, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Jorge Enrique González Pacheco

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable individual lacking non-trivial support. red dogsix (talk) 13:35, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Cuba-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:19, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm wondering until when the readers will be seeing the deletion template on Jorge Enrique Gonzalez Pacheco article. This article has lots of reference and verifiable information about this autor. I'm seeing little bit of discrimination with a Hispanic writer at the Wikipedia in English! Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.104.202.146 (talk) 04:27, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete promotional article created by the person's manager who has also been acting very disruptively, removing deletion tags and moving the article around to various titles. That doesn't affect the notability of the subject; as far as that is concerned, the claims to notability are very weak and I can't see that WP:NAUTHOR is met. --bonadea contributions talk 22:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:51, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as I examined the article but found nothing actually convincing for any independent notability. SwisterTwister   talk  05:55, 1 July 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.