Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pedro Perebal


 * 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. Consensus is that while notability is not temporary, this topic is not encyclopedic per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:BIO1E, in that coverage was covered only for a very brief time and as a novelty, not for any impact on culture or any given field of study. 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 15:29, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Pedro Perebal

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lack of real notability. Ten lauguages in eight more than I speak with any degreeof fluency, but for a linguis it is not a remarkable number; the principal ref Prens Libre is a run of the mill human interest story and I imagine the BBC Spanish service is a retread based on the Prens Libre story. TheLongTone (talk) 15:34, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:05, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:05, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Guatemala-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:05, 4 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Although I find the whole gee-whiz-somebody-who-speaks-multiple-languages thing uninteresting personally, BBC and Prensa Libre are reliable sources, and the coverage seems significant. Merge to List of polyglots weak keep, I guess. Cnilep (talk) 02:22, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * List of polyglots require that the entries have a Wikipedia article. Thinker78 (talk) 05:28, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment What has generated interest in his story is that he is not a linguist, but a private security guard (a minimum wage job around these parts) with little formal education. I'm still considering what to do with the article, though... –FlyingAce✈hello 03:43, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep: 1. The topic meets the general notability guideline. The topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject,   so it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article.
 * 2. The topic meets the people notability guideline. The person is worthy of notice or note, remarkable or significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded. It is my opinion that it is highly unusual, remarkable, interesting and maybe even unprecedented that a security guard in Guatemala learns ten languages. Thinker78 (talk) 05:15, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Exemplo347 (talk) 08:26, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   13:09, 19 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - being a polyglot is not a particularly remarkable thing (and it does not make a person a linguist - sorry, but that terminological point is not unimportant, and most linguists are not polyglots). Yes, speaking ten languages is impressive, but that is again not a criterion for notability. I do not see that GNG is met based on the sources presented above. --bonadea contributions talk 13:21, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The remarkable thing is that he was a security guard, who usually gets paid minimum wage, working in a repair shop in a seedy part of town and managed to learn basically by himself many foreign languages. And as proof of how remarkable that is he was a featured story in many media outlets, even internationally. Please tell me how you do not see the sources I posted as meeting the GNG. Thinker78 (talk) 18:41, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is the remarkable thing about him, please say so in the article. As the wording stands, it doesn't make a claim of significance. If you'd actually written what you wrote here, this might not have come to a deletion debate. Deb (talk) 13:56, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * You are right and I actually thought about it when I created the article. I have updated the article based on your suggestion.Thinker78 (talk) 06:22, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * But "remarkable" isn't a reason for keeping the article, especially since it is always a matter of personal opinion. Of the sources provided (above and in the article), the prensalibre.com one is the only independent source with more than brief coverage of the person. Make no mistake, I think it is a wonderful thing that people learn more languages, but if we actually read the sources, it becomes obvious that the claim made in the Wikipedia article is false - he speaks English, Italian, French, Portuguese, Spanish and Quiché, which is six languages of which four are rather closely related, and has a smattering of four other languages. The main story in the source is about him getting a scholarship to study German - again, that is great, his achievements and enthusiasm make me truly happy, but that does not make him notable. --bonadea contributions talk 08:37, 21 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I said "remarkable" because you were talking about not being remarkable, but the topic is notable as well as I have submitted evidence about in the form of reliable sources. According to the GNG "Independent of the subject" excludes works produced by the article's subject or someone affiliated with it. For example, advertising, press releases, autobiographies, and the subject's website are not considered independent" ."Brief" is wording that is not included in the GNG.


 * You said that the "if we actually read the sources, it becomes obvious that the claim made in the Wikipedia article is false - he speaks English, Italian, French, Portuguese, Spanish and Quiché, which is six languages of which four are rather closely related, and has a smattering of four other languages". I clearly stated that he speaks " ten languages with different degrees of fluency" and that is according to the sources (contained in the article) which I will quote "Perebal, quien habla 10 idiomas" (Spanish: "Perebal, who talks 10 languages"), "Indicó que habla inglés, italiano, francés, portugués, castellano y quiché; además, en fase intermedio domina el alemán, ruso, japonés y mandarín" (Spanish: "He indicated that he talks English, Italian, French, Portuguese, Spanish, and K'iche'; in addition, in intermediate phase he dominates the German, Russian, Japanese and Mandarin"). Prensa Libre has multiple articles about the subject, not just the one where he is going to study German. I will go through the other sources I provided:


 * The BBC. It is an independent source from the subject and a reliable source. It may not be a long article but is not just a passing mention either, so I believe it is significant coverage that the BBC had a full article just for him, addressing the topic directly and in detail, where information is given to us about his sex, his age, a job offer made to him, the languages he talks and that it even features a dedicated video showcasing languages that he speaks.


 * The YouTube video published by Univision's "Despierta America" (which is a variety morning show) is I believe a primary source because it is an interview of the subject, but which use as a source, if I'm not mistaken, is not against Wikipedia's policies. It is nevertheless independent from the subject, a reliable source, and covers the subject directly and in detail.


 * Canal6 is a reliable source and independent from the subject. It features a dedicated article to the subject, where it is addressed directly and in detail.


 * ChapinTV is a reliable source and independent from the subject. The article I provided is one of a series dedicated solely to him, and so the subject is addressed directly and in detail.


 * Gente d'Italia is independent from the subject and seems to be a reliable source. RAI (the Italian state-owned broadcaster) has an article about Gente d'Italia. Gente d'Italia's article about the subject is dedicated to it and addresses it directly and in detail. Thinker78 (talk) 01:26, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I read the people notability guideline and actually remarkable is one of its thresholds to determine notability, so being remarkable is indeed a reason to keep the article. Thinker78 (talk) 22:54, 26 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep per substantial coverage in reliable independent sources as noted above and coted in article. FloridaArmy (talk) 22:39, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
 * This is not really that substantial. It's an interesting but fundamentally run of the mill human interest story which, once published once, has generated o flurry of copycat coverage.TheLongTone (talk) 11:52, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete a total case of trivial coverage with no substance to justify an article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:30, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * How come you say "trivial coverage"? It actually has substantial coverage. You only need to see that the subject has multiple coverage by the same sources like Prensa Libre and ChapinTV. That is not trivial. Thinker78 (talk) 03:28, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * It's trivial. Look at any news source, you'll se trivial feel-good human interest stories. these do not make the subject notable, and to repeat myself, jounos being lazy will pick up stories from other sources, hence a cascade of repeats of the same story. It's like crimes, which generate news coverage but are generally not notable unless there is significanyt ongoing coveage.TheLongTone (talk) 11:49, 26 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:BIO1E. We want biographies of people with enduring notability, not perma-stubs on the ten-minutes-of-fame of someone who will likely never be written about again. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 16:52, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTNEWS states that "Wikipedia considers the enduring notability of persons and events". But at this point you don't know and can't know whether the subject will have an enduring notability. Per WP:CRYSTALBALL, "Wikipedia is not a collection of unverifiable speculation. Wikipedia does not predict the future." WP:BIO1E refers specifically to events not achievements. The subject in this case is notable because of his remarkable achievement of being a security guard working in a seedy part of town in Guatemala and learning by himself many foreign languages. He was not involved in any event. According to WP:BIO, "...the person who is the topic of a biographical article should be 'worthy of notice'... or 'note'... – that is, 'remarkable'... or 'significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded' within Wikipedia as a written account of that person's life." The sources I provided prove very much that the person is worthy of notice, remarkable, significant, interesting and unusual enough. Thinker78 (talk) 23:41, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  A  Train talk 07:37, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
 * (Admin note) As Thinker78 believes that my closing of this AfD as delete was in error, I am reopening and relisting this AfD as a courtesy. You will find the relevant discussion here.  A  Train talk 07:37, 29 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete- per WP:BIO1E and WP:NOTNEWS. I basically agree with User:Joe Roe. This is a bio of someone who got a minor flurry of attention for fifteen minutes but no enduring notability. Likely to remain a permastub indefinitely. Reyk YO! 07:52, 29 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Leaning delete or userspace for more drafting (Thinker78 has IDed at least one source, an Mexican interview, not used in the article yet). Striking option not viable: Replace with a concise entry in List of polyglots (since it's verifiable information, so we need not expunge even the mention of him). I agree with the N, NOTNEWS, NOTINDISCRIMINATE, and BIO1E arguments: while there's a small amount of coverage, most of it's trivial, and the one piece that is not is focused on him getting a scholarship and on the "gee whiz" aspect (i.e. people being prejudicially surprised that a security guard isn't a dullard).  This isn't the enduring notability we're looking for.  Four of the six languages he's actually competent in are closely related in vocabulary and grammar, and a fifth (English) derives much of its vocabulary from one of those four (French).  So there's just really not much there, from an encyclopedic perspective, even if it's a fun human-interest story.  Honestly, it probably takes more time and devotion to become a top-100, national-class pool (billiards) player or skateboarder, yet such people are not notable (and often have more coverage, at least in the specialist press like pool and skating magazines). This is a borderline case, and while I tend to lean inclusionist, I do so primarily on the basis of likelihood that the subject will have more coverage later and increased relevance to the public. I'm skeptical in this case, because I think even if he learns Romanian, Galician, and Catalan over the next few years, more detailed coverage isn't likely because the story hasn't really changed at all from a journalistic or public perspective, and if it doesn't and there's not more coverage then there's no encyclopedic story to tell, either.  That is, Perebal doesn't really  to the general public on any segment of the world stage, more than the next random person matters (and by a certain age, most of us are quite competent at one or more things).  He's simply had his 15 minutes (in primarily local- or regional-interest publication). And good for him; too bad we don't have more news coverage of interesting people who aren't criminals or involved in a scandal.  But, really, by 2020, no one will remember or care other than Perebal's friends and family, and collectors of language- or guard-related trivia.  It's not really fair, perhaps, but the "one hit wonder" band that charted with a top-10 hit in 1987 and then broke up remains notable because their song still gets played and people still care enough to want to know about the band.  That won't be true of the obscure guy who "knows" 10 languages.  Nothing is going to make him stick in the public mind (unless he becomes more notable for some other reason, like saving the life of the Guatemalan president, or winning that international pool and skateboarding biathlon :-).  In short, if we don't delete this now, we'll delete it in a few years, after his obscurity becomes more obviously opaque with time.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  11:02, 31 May 2018 (UTC); revised: 07:03, 1 June 2018 (UTC); revised again: 00:08, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm not understanding BIO1E very well. I thought it applied only to people notable for only one event. The subject is not related to any event that I know of. How does it apply here? Thinker78 (talk) 21:05, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Btw, the subject has many more articles about himself in Prensa Libre and ChapinTV, not just the ones I mention, and to be included in the List of polyglots, the subject needs to have an article in Wikipedia. Thinker78 (talk) 21:09, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Answering on the talk page; I don't want to WP:BLUDGEON the AfD. Also covered in more detail here. Short version: "event" doesn't have a narrow definition in BIO1E, though it's not the strongest argument presented here anyway.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:03, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * delete . Nonnotable feat. 15 minutes of fame in the news, but there are no really reliable sources which discuss his level of mastery of the languages. I myself can say hello and thank you in 37 languages (thanks, Wikipedia :-) Staszek Lem (talk) 18:04, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: The subject got significant news coverage, got coverage even in international media, in Mexico, Honduras, the BBC and an Italian international publication; got coverage multiple times continuously for about a month in at least two national sources, Prensa Libre and ChapinTV, from April 2018 to  May 2018.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thinker78 (talk • contribs) 23:52, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You have already said that, . And replied to almost every comment in this discussion. I think we know what your position is at this point. It's time to let the process happen (again). –&#8239;Joe (talk) 09:37, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * There is a good reason that link of Bludgeon is only an essay. Some editors can come up with the most unreasonable things. That essay is just a wish to bludgeon minority views out of a full debate. Besides, I didn't point out previously the international nature of the sources or the continuous coverage of the subject. In fact, I added this comment because of my discussion with SMcCandlish, who was not aware of the international origin of the sources and thought all the sources were local. Thinker78 (talk) 22:10, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * sigh I entirely fail to see why this afd has been reopened, simply because one editor feels passionately about it. Well of course they do, they wrote the page. Despite this, they seem to be unwilling to update the article to reflect changes inn Senor Perebal's circunstances, altho they can come up with a ref to back up the info.TheLongTone (talk) 14:18, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * FWIW, if I hadn't reopened this AfD, I'd bet $20 that Thinker78 would have just taken it to WP:DRV. Someone's time was going to get wasted, regardless.  A  Train talk 16:52, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * TheLongTone, I didn't correct the information in the article because I already reverted your addition so I didn't want to be seen as if I was edit warring. Thinker78 (talk) 22:32, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually changing the content rather than reverting would not be edit warring, it would be constructive. The article ref dsays he is a security guard; you have a ref saying he now does something else. Why not use your time constructively by improving this (imo doomed ))article.TheLongTone (talk) 10:59, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * A Train, you are right, I would have, but the house didn't take your bet, so you are left without the $20 win. I have to say that the reopening made the consensus more clear, because the media interviews event reasoning did not provide much clarity and I'm still puzzled about it. Thinker78 (talk) 22:32, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
 * TheLongTone, the earlier sources stated that he was at the time a security guard but the story evolved and the source I showed you that indicates he is no longer a security guard is a more recent one. At this point I don't know what you want in the article so if I make further edits that you don't like you probably will do a manual revert, changing the content back as it was. So to avoid the impression that I am edit warring I will let other editors (including you) change it if they so want or let it stay as it is, even though it currently contains untrue information. Thinker78 (talk) 17:07, 4 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete As stated above, this is a classical case of 15 min of local fame. The subject do not pass per WP:GNG by being a polyglot alone and thus has no encyclopedic value. Shellwood (talk) 19:51, 4 June 2018 (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.