Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ludmyrna Lopez (2nd 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. North America1000 08:43, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

Ludmyrna Lopez
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Inadequately sourced WP:BLP of a person notable primarily as a city councillor, in a city not large enough to confer automatic notability freebies on its city councillors. Of the eight footnotes here, four are primary sources (i.e. her own "staff" profiles on the websites of the city and organizations she's directly affiliated with) that cannot demonstrate or support notability, and one of the "media" hits comes from the local university's journalism school rather than a real media outlet — while the three that actually represent real reliable source coverage all just nominally verify her initial election rather than offering any substantive ongoing coverage of anything she did in the role. And the only other potential "notable for other reasons" claims here are not referenced to coverage of her work in those roles, but to background mentions of it in the elected-to-city-council coverage -- which is not how you demonstrate that a city councillor has a valid claim of preexisting notability for other reasons besides being a city councillor either. Bearcat (talk) 16:40, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:30, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:30, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:30, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:31, 3 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Doesn't meet notability guidelines. I found only one other mention of her and it is a passing one. --Gprscrippers (talk) 17:41, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. SportingFlyer  talk  01:57, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete for reasons given by Bearcat, and because my searches aren't showing much.E.M.Gregory (talk) 18:52, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per Bearcat. Redditaddict69 (talk) (contribs)  23:13, 10 September 2018 (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.