Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patricio Luna


 * 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. Geschichte (talk) 08:33, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Patricio Luna

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE. Created by two SPAs who have been trying to get this into mainspace for a while... a draft was started at Draft:Patricio Luna, then abandoned and the article created directly in mainspace. Regarding the acting career, the only source is a link to iMDb (an unreliable source) which states that the subject only played a bit part in one episode of a telenovela, and wasn't even credited for it. The last source doesn't mention the subject at all – I assume he took the photo in the article, but there's no photo credit, and that wouldn't make him notable. All the remaining sources are in sources which are at first glance reliable, but on further investigation are just the same identical press release/promotional material spammed over various websites, complete with the subject's contact details at the bottom advertising for work. I cannot find any reliable sources at all for this subject. Richard3120 (talk) 18:26, 20 December 2021 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   21:03, 27 December 2021 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:56, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. Richard3120 (talk) 18:29, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Richard3120 (talk) 18:29, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Richard3120 (talk) 18:29, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete. Per nom, the sources seem to be the same promotional spam. That azcentral.com happens to be part of the USA Today Network doesn't mean that he got a write-up in USA Today. No there there. BBQboffin (talk) 00:44, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per above assessment. No independent coverage in RS.-KH-1 (talk) 01:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG lacks significant coverage on the subject, looks promotional.Juggyevil (talk) 08:11, 6 January 2022 (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.