Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicholas Bastidas


 * 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. ✗ plicit  05:13, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Nicholas Bastidas

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG - I can't find anything to indicate that they are notable. The creator and most recent new editor I suspect have a COI as they have only edited this. KylieTastic (talk) 11:29, 29 November 2021 (UTC) Several mentions in news: NBC Long Island, Newsday, ABC 7, ABC 7 (2nd Mention), Inside Edition.Jfp316 (talk) 20:44, 2 December 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:09, 6 December 2021 (UTC) Delete No significant coverage. As side note, question whether User:Jfp316 has COI, looking at their edit history. -- rsjaffe 🗩 🖉 05:19, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. KylieTastic (talk) 11:29, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. KylieTastic (talk) 11:29, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * delete no independent sources. notability isn't proved. --IgorTurzh (talk) 12:37, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ecuador-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:23, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:24, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:26, 29 November 2021 (UTC)
 * unfortunately you are correct it is mentions (and quotes) rather than significant coverage. They rightly get a name check for their good work, but it's not enough for encyclopedic notability (as currently defined). KylieTastic (talk) 18:34, 7 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. All I could find were passing mentions and no SIGCOV, which therefore means it fails our notability guidelines. Pilaz (talk) 19:04, 8 December 2021 (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.