Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Millôr Fernandes


 * 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. consensus is that sourcing to establish notability is available TravellingCari  23:50, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Millôr Fernandes

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

lacks evidence to prove he meets WP:CREATIVE Michellecrisp (talk) 22:53, 28 October 2008 (UTC) *Strong keep - Meet WP:N, he together with Jaguar (cartoonist), Ziraldo and Prosperi criticized in the newspaper O Pasquim the Brazilian military dictatorship that installed itself after 1964.
 * Keep The Portuguese version  of the article has some sourcing and shows he is more notable than the English version asserts - a 70+ year career as author, poet, cartoonist, playwright and additional info can be found among the large number of Ghits for him.  Edward321 (talk) 23:33, 28 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The article Jaguar (cartoonist) is also being AfD. See Articles for deletion/Jaguar (cartoonist). EconomistBR  23:59, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete- The article, which is 3 years old, has been edited less than 10 times. It has no sources and is still a low quality stub. The Brazilian Project must have some responsability over its articles. Delete per WP:Sources and per WP:CREATIVE. EconomistBR  00:18, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is reliable sources in Portuguese (and the English Wikipedia doesn't need all sources in English). I protest about copy-and-paste commentary presented above. To be stub is not a sin. There is countless stubs in the Wikipedia (and articles about English-related things), but is not reason for deletion. Zero Kitsune (talk) 01:16, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * That article is a disservice to his history, it doesn't mention the arrests, the persecution, his work, nothing. Now if it were 2 months old, no problem, but it is 3 years old. It's better to delete the article and when someone has the time, the information and the sources re-create it. Big deal. EconomistBR  03:22, 29 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions.   —Cunard (talk) 06:18, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Spurious nomination. Subject has been exhibited in major national art gallery, and clearly meets WP:V and WP:NOTE. Extend article content and add cited sources. AfD is not cleanup. --Gene_poole (talk) 08:26, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notability has been demonstrated above. We don't delete articles to punish members of projects. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:49, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep although the article itself lack of sources, several independent reliable sources prove he's actually notable:, and . Tosqueira (talk) 16:56, 1 November 2008 (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.