Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcello Ferrada de Noli


 * 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. Mackensen (talk) 12:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Marcello Ferrada de Noli

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable academic. All non-self-published mentions of this retired professor of epidemiology are because of his association with SWEDHR, an organization founded by him, that comprises of 6 people with advanced degrees in different fields, and whose only output is statements supporting the views of the Russian government, which are in turn repeated by pro-Russian media outlets. Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 05:03, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   11:31, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   11:31, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.   CAPTAIN RAJU  (✉)   11:31, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Comment: Pubmed https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Ferrada-Noli%20M%5BAuthor%5D&cauthor=true&cauthor_uid=9479680 lists a few articles that seem to be in reputable journals not related to SWEDHR.Billlion (talk) 17:30, 23 April 2017 (UTC)

*Keep Ferrada de Noli has featured in a front page article in Dagens Nyheter along with other Swedish sources such as Aftonbladet, Expressen, Goteborg Posten, Metro, VK, Swedish News Agency TT, etc, etc. He is clearly notable outside pro-Russian media outlets. Guru Noel (talk) 12:15, 24 April 2017 (UTC) blocked sockpuppet. My very best wishes (talk) 17:16, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment: I want to expand on my AfD proposal above, to provide some context. It is clear that Professor Ferrada de Noli has some academic publications, and has written opinion pieces in newspapers related to his work. However, the volume and significance of his academic output over his career (he is now retired) do not rise to the notability standards established by WP:PROF. The only other potentially notable fact about him is the fact that he founded SWEDHR, an opinion website run by a group of six people with advanced academic degrees in very different fields that posts opinion pieces supportive of the Russian government's policy positions, and is in turn cited by pro-government Russian media (Sputnik, RT, etc) as external evidence for the rightness of Russian policy. The coverage in mainstream Swedish media focuses entirely on the confusion among Swedes at the prominence afforded in Russia to a supposedly Swedish organization that is unknown in Sweden. At the same time, SWEDHR is notable because it is founded by a supposedly notable academic, and Ferrada de Noli is notable because he founded SWEDHR, which is highly circular. If WP editors with experience in determining the notability of academics conclude that Prof. Ferrada de Noli's academic work is not sufficient for notability, then I propose that this page be deleted and any relevant information about him be folded into the SWEDHR page, which has already been rewritten to indicate that it is actually a propaganda organization.Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 23:54, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Behavioural science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Comment: The "highly circular" argument above, which is presented by his author as a main reason for his AfD proposal, it is based on an utterly false premise. Namely, the article on Ferrada de Noli was created December 12, 2009 (meaning the time when WP assessed that the professor met the notability criteria), whereas SWEDHR was founded only in 2015. Ergo, the foundation of SWEDHR cannot possibly be the factor which has determined the professor's notability --already recognized in the 2009 assessments. Secondly, here emerges a serious contradiction: Just some days ago, in the discussion of the proposal for obtaining the deletion of the SWEDHR article, which user Gamesmaster G-9 supported, he declared, "The medical cites speak to the notability of Marcello Ferrada de Noli, the founder, and not to the organization (SWEDHR)". But here he argues exactly the opposite, that the very same medical cites do not speak for the notability of the professor… Hrdap (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:06, 25 April 2017 (UTC)  --Hrdap (talk) 03:55, 25 April 2017 (UTC)


 * KeepWP:PROF lists nine criteria for academic notability, and says, "Academics/professors meeting any one of the following conditions, as substantiated through reliable sources, are notable". A review of the info and sources already published in the article reveals that Professor Marcello Ferrada de Noli has met at least five out of nine criteria of the WP:PROF list (1,2,4,5, and 7).
 * I have looked through the academic citations in the article, and they appear to be typical of any lifelong academic. Some unremarkable events, such as the offer of a visiting professorship, are being touted as achievements, when they are really quite common. In my view, his academic achievements to not meet the standards listed out in WP:PROF. It would be great if an editor experienced in editing pages of professors could offer an opinion here. Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 19:05, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Regardless academic notability (which can be earned by having "any one" among the items in WP:PROF), Wikipedia also recognize notability regarding individuals that have participated in the foundation of a political party. The following data has been in the article for quite some years, and supported by three sources, two of which appear to be academic dissertations: "Marcello Ferrada de Noli was one of the founders of MIR, the Movement of the Revolutionary Left. MIR was a Chilean political party and former left-wing guerrilla organization (founded on October 12, 1965) prominent in the resistance to the Pinochet Dictatorship. Together with his old-time school friend Miguel Enríquez (died in combat 1974) and Marco A. Enríquez, Ferrada de Noli was an author of the Political-military Theses of MIR - known also as La Tesis Insurreccional - the first document of MIR approved in its foundation congress of 1965;[6][7][8] there he represented left-libertarian standpoints.
 * I would have no problem if the page is rewritten with a focus on his revolutionary past. As it stands now, it reads like the page of a professor and not of a radical activist.Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 19:05, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Comment: The article seems very biased. Very small achievements, like being a visiting professor or becoming emeritus professor (which is fairly standard for retiring professors in Sweden) at a very minor university, are listed as 'academic distinctions' or 'awards'. If the article is not deleted, it should be thoroughly revised.


 * Delete. Based on the editing history, this is a promotional page created by an WP:SPA with a probable conflict of interest. It might be a good idea to remove all such pages (as a matter of policy) and see if anyone without COI would recreate them. My very best wishes (talk) 19:59, 25 April 2017 (UTC)

Update: This article in French newspaper Le Figaro is a perfect example of the circularity problem I described above. In the article, the journalist speaks to Swedes who do not know who Ferrada de Noli is, and then has to use this Wikipedia page as a reference (In French: "According to his extremely long Wikipedia page, the man himself has had a very eclectic career"). In fact, this Wikipedia page is used as a defense by his supporters and Russian against accusations that he and his organization function purely as Western-based mouthpieces for Russian propaganda. In the most recent piece on his blog, Ferrada de Noli has lashed out against this ongoing AfD debate, and accused the editors who have recently made edits on this page and that of SWEDHR of "massive text decimation and the introduction of deceitful, and even racist-wise edits", and having the same "agenda" as the "fake news" (note the term) published by Dagens Nyheter (actually a respectable mainstream newspaper). Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 20:44, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Hmm... This is worse than I thought. Note that he appears on the image in your link under banner of RT (TV network), and we all know that "his" organization, Swedish Doctors for Human Rights (a misleading title) is actively engaged in propaganda/big lie efforts. This looks to me as misuse of WP not only for promotion, but also for propaganda. Now I am fully convinced this page should be deleted. My very best wishes (talk) 14:50, 26 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Note to closing admin. User Hrdap who voted above (editing history) is an SPA account dedicated to promotion of Swedish Doctors for Human Rights. Based on their edits, like here, he/she probably has a conflict of interest. My very best wishes (talk) 15:39, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Hrdap (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)  User Hrdap
 * Comment:I could argue with exactly the same allegation: "Based on their edits like, users 'My very best wishes' and 'Gamesmasterg9’ probably have a conflict of interests." Political interests in this case, as I show down below. (And Gamesmasterg9 is the author of the deletion proposal here after that the deletion of the SWEDHR article failed. ‘Conflict of interests?’). Beginning with ‘notability’: a) Main notability aspect in this article is the “pioneer” character of discoveries done by the professor, as judged by a mayor medical university. E.g. While working at Harvard Medical School, he was first in the research world that established the overrepresentation of immigrants in Sweden’s suicides. This discovery brought about changes in the social policies of Sweden. And there are other research discoveries listed in the article, sourced in international scientific journals. b) Gamesmasterg9: “As it stands now, it reads like the page of a professor”, as if Ferrada de Noli was not a professor, and in this case misrepresenting his professor title. Serious libel c) Then the absurd: “Le Figaro journalist speaks to Swedes who do not know who Ferrada de Noli is”. But Le Figaro article is in French! And Le Figaro article is so inaccurate to the point of presenting the professor as “companion of Pinochet” (compagnon de route de Pinochet), whereas Ferrada de Noli was imprisoned by Pinochet after the failed military resistance by MIR (it’s all in the article, well sourced). Also is clearly referred in the article that Ferrada de Noli’s title “Professor Emeritus” is an academic distinction, not a retirement status. A diploma states “Title of Distinction in value of meritorious academic services". The political libel: d) Most of the untruthful political characterizations on SWEDHR are ‘sourced’ in one article in Dagens Nyheter (DN). But DN nowhere has written that Swedhr “only output is statements supporting the views of the Russian government. “ This is instead what DN published on that part of the interview with Professor Ferrada de Noli: (The journalist says): "The issues you raise coincide with the Russian government’s line" (the professor interrupts the journalist): "–No, now I interrupt you. We only have our own line. Whether that coincide or not with the positions of different countries, that is not our intention." As seen, quite different of what Gamesmasterg9 has stated here to ground his deletion proposal. Another serious libel reads, “after the Khan Shaykhun chemical attack in Syria, SWEDHR claimed in their magazine The Indicter that the attack was staged by the Syrian volunteer civilian defense group, the White Helmets . But, the article given as source is authored by an American independent researcher who has nothing to do with SWEDHR. And it gets worse, nowhere in that article is mentioned any Khan Shaykhun chemical attack. And there is an “Editors Note” that says “Mr Adam Larsson's contribution to this debate in The Indicter is an opinion article, whose content do not necessary represent neither the editorial position of The Indicter Magazine nor of SWEDHR.” Hrdap (talk) 00:28, 27 April 2017 (UTC)Regarding Wikipedia policy, in my opinion, the most flagrant infringement in those edits here and in the Swedhr page, is an absolute disrespect for the neutrality stance. If they post about a claim on the professor in DN, they should be posting what the subject has replied about that claim, and give the source . The same about Le Figaro article.
 * @Hdarp, are you telling that you do not have a conflict of interest? But then why did you do this edit? Well, the subject might be notable, but the page was misused for promotion. My very best wishes (talk) 02:08, 27 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Just his involvement with MIR makes him notable, not to mention everything after MIR.Huldra (talk) 23:56, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Weak keep--if he is notable it is only for his involvement with MIR, and even that is poorly documented. Google Books has precious little to offer for someone with such an article (OK, most of it is vanispam), and of the three references that claim him as a founder of MIR, two are theses and the third is About.com. Drmies (talk) 03:05, 27 April 2017 (UTC)

Note closing admin and to academic reviewers

Multiple edits of 27 April 2017 by same user, erased all the second sources referred to peer-review scientific journals that have published, commented or referred a series of pioneering discoveries by Ferrada Noli. The user also erased in the text and in References a published discovery of clinical significance (on psychiatric-comorbidity). See edit. After that, the user claimed ‘absence of secondary sources’ capable to substantiate academic notability. Thereafter, the same user deleted the reference containing the written motivation in an academic award issued by the “Instituto Superior de Ciencias Medicas de Habana” (oldest medical university in Latin America), that reads: "For his pioneer contribution to epidemiological research." (See edit . Secondary sources (international scientific journals, documents from the Swedish Parliament and the Swedish National Institute of Public Health, etc.) that appeared in the version before the arbitrary erasing, in Reference list here.

Google references on scientific research are not found in “Google Books”, but found in “Google Scholar”. Searching “Ferrada Noli” in Google Scholar gives 645 results (retrieved 30 April 2017). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.110.198.7 (talk) 13:39, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete OK wow! This man is an incredible self-promoter. I looked up his claim of being the founder of MIR, and not a single reliable source supports this claim. In this very detailed piece for a socialist magazine, the founders of the MIR are named as Miguel Enríquez Espinoza and Luciano Cruz. Ferrada de Noli is not mentioned even once. This history of the MIR also credits Enríquez and doesn't mention Ferrada de Noli. A search of books on the Pinochet years, including this one by award-winning correspondent John Dinges and this one by Princeton history professor Jonathan Haslam reveal exactly zero mentions of Ferrada de Noli, but they all refer to Miguel Enríquez as the man behind MIR. The only external source that mentions Ferrada de Noli is this piece, which seems reliable, until you look at the bottom of the page and see this: "A Special Thanks: Marcello Ferrada-Noli is a founder of the MIR, a close friend of Miguel Enríquez and one of the few survivors of those troubled times." So, the the only sources that credit him are the ones that he himself contributed to. I don't want to engage in libel, but I am also troubled by the fact that Enríquez and most of the other leaders of the MIR did not survive the Pinochet regime, and cannot promote their roles.
 * It is quite possible that Ferrada de Noli was a member of MIR, but listing himself as a founder of that organization seems part of a pattern of exaggeration just like his academic credentials. It is also not the only example here on Wikipedia. In the article about the Russell Tribunal, Ferrada de Noli is listed alongside Gabriel García Márquez and historian Vladimir Dedijer as a participant in the 1974 Tribunal in Rome. However, this CIA document from the time lists all the participants. García Márquez and Dedijer both appear in the list, but once again, no mention of Ferrada de Noli. Looking at the history of that page, this edit was made by User:Inkerifi, who is also the major contributor to this page, and who also inserted Ferrada de Noli's name  into the page on the MIR. This has entered other language Wikipedias as well, through translation.
 * I think the evidence is quite clear that Wikipedia should not be providing legitimacy to this man. Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 08:50, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

Strong Keep The participation of Ferrada-Noli in the foundation congress of MIR in August 1965 is well documented. The book “La Constituyente Revolucionaria – Historia de la fundación del MIR chileno” (“The Revolutionary Founding – History of the foundation of the Chilean MIR”) by Marco Álvarez, LOM Ediciones 2015, mentions that participation and also reproduce quotes voiced by Ferrada-Noli during that foundation event. The quote is sourced in an interview done by author Alvarez with a Chilean politician, the lawyer Juan Saavedra (former mayor of San Miguel, in Santiago). Saavedra was also a founder of the MIR (his own book here presented by the son of Miguel Eríquez and candidate in Chile’s president election


 * The term "founder" of MIR is being thrown around quite casually here. The article about Saavedra talks about his involvement with MIR, but apart from a mention as "fundador" (a word which also appears in the subtitle of the book written by his son), there is no mention of how he actually founded the organization. Saavedra also does not have a page either on the English or Spanish Wikipedia, which is odd, given that his supposed co-founder Miguel Enríquez has a pretty extensive page. Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 05:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Rebuttal: Juan Saavedra was member in a later Central Central Committee of MIR. He is also mentioned as one of the founders of MIR in the book by historian Marco Alvarez, book which specific theme is the "History of the Fundation of the Chilean MIR".

The book by the French historian Eugenia Palieraki, researcher at Universtité Cergy-Pontoise (translation: “The revolution yet to arrive! The Chilean MIR in the sixties”), LOM Ediciones, 2015, 482 pages, is considered the most comprehensive history of MIR. It mentions Marcello Ferrada in multiple occasions, all of these in connection with Miguel Enríquez and the developments leading to the foundation of MIR. In her book, Palieraki never mentions Ferrada Noli as a source for her mentions about him. Some theses of Palieraki (not on the foundation MIR) about the role of the University of Concepción in the universitary reform movement of the sixties, are commented in Ferrada's recent publication here: which also mentions the concrete political steps in the transformation of their old organisation VRM towards the foundation of MIR.


 * Rebuttal: Palieraki does not develop on the "friendship between Enríquez and Ferrada", but refers Ferrada and Enríquez in the development of political events and organizations that ended in the foundation of MIR.


 * Again, we can agree that Ferrada was a) a friend of Enríquez, and b) politically active in leftist movements at the time. That describes a great many people, and should not merit a Wikipedia page.Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 05:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Rebuttal: Well documented that Ferrada was one of the founders of the Chilean MIR. That he was also a close friend with Enríquez cannot be used as argument against the facts around the foundation of MIR.

The book by Mauricio Ahumada &  Pedro Naranjo “Miguel Enríquez, el proyecto revolucionario en Chile”  , a biography book on Miguel Enríquez, clearly stated that Ferrada was a founder of MIR, a close friend with Miguel Enríquez, and co-author of the “Political-Military Thesis” which was the first document approved in the foundation congress. Again, the source is not Ferrada Noli.


 * A google book search of this book shows that it does mention Ferrada - as a friend of Enríquez, and one of a large group of university classmates with whom he discussed Marxist ideas. I have no doubt that Ferrada and Enríquez were friends. This still doesn't make him a founder of MIR. Interestingly, Ferrada is mentioned alongside Máximo Jara, Claudio Sepúlveda, Rodrigo Rojas, Martín Hernández, Jorge Gutiérrez, etc. It seems unlikely that they were all "founders". The only person mentioned as a co-founder is Bautista van Schouwen, who has his own page. See also, footnote 99 in this book, which mentions that "the first political commission of the MIR included: Miguel Enríquez, Bautista van Schouwen, Edgardo Enríquez, Andrés Pascal, Nelson Gutiérrez, Robert Moreno, Arturo Vilabella and Humberto Sotomayor". All of these names, yet no Ferrada.Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 05:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Rebuttal: The affirmation above, "The only person mentioned as a co-founder is Bautista van Schouwen" is a plain lie. This is the French translation of the passage by author Naranjo on the foundation of MIR, day 15 Augut 1965,
 * "Ou cours de l'événement furent approuvés la Déclaration de Principes, le Programme, les questions d'organisation, et une Thèse Politico-Militaire, “La conquête du pouvoir par la voie insurrectionnelle” présentée par Miguel mais à son élaboration partici

pèrent aussi Marco Antonio et Edgardo Enríquez E., Bautista van Schouwen et Marcelo Ferrada. Ce document fut un pas nouveau et significatif dans les définitions théoriques d’alors en précisant au sein d’une unité le problème de la lutte armée en relation avec le parti révolutionnaire prolétarien…"

The book “El Rebelde de la Burguesia”, a biography of Miguel Enríquez by Avendaño & Palma, Ediciones CESOC, 2001, also mentions Ferrada as founder of MIR and co-author of the “Political-Military Thesis” together with Miguel Enriquez and Marco Antonio Enríquez. The authors source the information in an interview done in Paris, with then history professor at Sorbonne Marco Antonio Enríquez.


 * Same as before - Ferrada is mentioned as one of many friends of Enríquez at university. Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 05:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

The user mentioning the "thanks to Ferrara-Noli" which is quoted above in this page, omits the continuation of the phrase that indicates "thanks for the picture" in which Ferrada-Noi appear together with his friends Miguel Enriquez and Bautista Van Schouwen, already three years before they founded MIR. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.110.198.7 (talk) 13:32, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Since they were friends, it is very reasonable that they appeared in a photo together. That's not notability. Gamesmaster G-9 (talk) 05:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete Non-notable doctor, self-promotional page. No independent sources that support notability. It's an impressive job by the page creator and primary contributor, but ultimately, it's all smoke and mirrors and a lot of circular referencing. Begone! CrispyGlover (talk) 21:54, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete in addition to the series of persuasive arbuments made by Nom Gamesaster, there is an assertion that he was a notable member of the Chilean Movimiento de Izquierda Revolucionaria. The sourcing for this claim, however, is extraordinarily weak, consisting, as it does, of an old man who fled to Sweden (where gaining political refugee status in the wake of the overthrow of Allende was extraordinarily easy - the sympathetic Swedes just took your world for it,) decades later man gives interviews about how important he was back  in the day.  Seriously?  Chile is a literate country, it had newspapers, more to the point: reams of memoirs, articles, books, dissertations  have been published about the MIR - copious sources would be available on anyone who was a significant actor on the Chilean left in the early 70s.E.M.Gregory (talk) 23:21, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete since the main claim to notability (MIR) appears to be unsupported and the rest aren't enough for an article. Sjö (talk) 06:59, 3 May 2017 (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.