Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pedro Ferriz de Con


 * 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   no consensus. T. Canens (talk) 15:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Pedro Ferriz de Con

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not appear to meet the notability criteria for Creative Professionals. Philafrenzy (talk) 22:27, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 02:32, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 02:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 02:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 02:33, 27 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. It would be helpful if the nominator could explain what steps were taken to ascertain that the subject "does not appear to meet the notability criteria for Creative Professionals", such as, for example, checking the source provided in the article or looking at the search results served up by the nomination procedure? Phil Bridger (talk) 17:16, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Keep. I haven't looked for sources on this since he is a very well known journalist in Mexico, with years of presence in press, radio and television, and he should meet notability by WP standards rather easily. To draw a rough comparisson, he is about as notable as Neil Cavuto is in the US. The article is not promotional at all, and with so little content verifiability shouldn't be a concern either. Of course, I'll be glad to actually go fetch some sources to back this up if it is necessary - frankie (talk) 02:48, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:13, 10 July 2011 (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.