Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luis Garza


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 21:33, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Luis Garza

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I would like to submit the Luis Garza article for speedy deletion. This page has only one citation. The person is not of relevance to the Catholic Church nor to the Legion of Christ nor to society at large. For example, I could create many articles on many priests around the world, but that would not be of relevance. Luis Garza has never written a book, never has been the president of a school, and he is not "the second highest ranking person in the organization" like the article alludes to. During my research, I found that he is simply a Mexican priest who happens to live in the United States and is part of the Legion of Christ. In my opinion, there is no reason for this article to exists.24.216.70.255 (talk) 19:29, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - I completed the nomination for the IP. I didn't think speedy was an option so I brought it here. ansh 666 20:18, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ansh 666  20:20, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. ansh 666  20:20, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. ansh 666  20:20, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. ansh 666  20:20, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ansh 666  20:20, 12 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep: Presumably nominated in error. The nomination says "The person is not of relevance to the Catholic Church nor to the Legion of Christ" but - as the reference in the article attests - he was certainly Vicar General. StAnselm (talk) 20:54, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as the reference confirms his former position, more references would be helpful Atlantic306 (talk) 21:52, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep: Agreed that this article lacks reliable sources. Confirming User:StAnselm's comment about clear relevance for the Legion both as #2 in command and as the one to break the sexual scandal of Fr Maciel. I can tell from non-reliable sources (word of mouth) that most of the info is true but someone really needs to source this. >> M.P.Schneider,LC (parlemus • feci) 01:36, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: Needs more sourcing to pass GNG. p  b  p  03:56, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment – Note that per WP:NEXIST, topic notability is based upon source availability, rather than the state of sourcing in articles. North America1000 08:30, 19 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete: There is no proof that Luis Garza was the first to break the sexual scandal of Marcial Maciel. Many others within the congregation and without actually tried to address the scandal but to no avail. The notion that Luis Garza was the first to break the sexual scandal is without reason. Also, the fact that Garza was Vicar General of a congregation of little note, does not require him to have a Wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.216.70.255 (talk) 05:28, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note that it's considered inappropriate for a nominator to also have a bolded vote outside the nomination statement. You should probably strike this out.  Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 06:44, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as this is currently a stub article, I updated with RC-bio-stub, WP Mexico & search template (to talk page) thereby hoping to attract attention of more editors. I agree this article needs more Refs but I did not tag with Refimprove because it already has stubs. Regards, — JoeHebda • (talk) 14:18, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Garza was clearly a high ranking person within the Catholic hierarchy. PBP has expressed a general dislike of the vast majority of articles on figures within religious hierarchies, and has been routinely defeated in his attempts to delete such articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 06:14, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Johnpacklambert needs to stop personalizing things. He also needs to realize why I vote delete on articles like these: if there aren't sources independent of the church of which somebody is an official, I vote delete.  There are many other people who agree with my stance on this, and therefore many articles that have been deleted on this premise.  p  b  p  15:28, 14 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment most of the sources used in this article are news publications that have no ownership relationship with the Catholic Church. PBP's interpretation of what and what is not a related source has been resoundly defeated in the long discussions related to his failed attempt to delete the article on Octaviano Tenorio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnpacklambert (talk • contribs) 19:49, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
 * "Resoundly defeated"? That article was closed as no consensus, and it doesn't matter if it was keep, delete, or no consensus, it doesn't have any particular bearing on this AfD.  p  b  p  22:50, 15 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Loads of coverage in reliable sources is found by this book search. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 12:21, 18 August 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.