Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sérgio Trindade (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Barkeep49 (talk) 03:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Sérgio Trindade
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

As discussed at the April AfD, the subject appears to fail WP:BASIC. Sources provided mention involvement with the IPCC, but as discussed previously, notability is not inherited. Most of the sources available that are specifically about the subject are obituaries.

pinging due to your involvement at the first AfD. VQuakr (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. VQuakr (talk) 21:33, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:48, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:48, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of COVID-19-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:48, 9 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete I participated at the DRV. I won't be too disappointed if this gets kept, but he really only received coverage because he passed away from COVID, which played up his collaboration with the IPCC and incorrectly called him a Nobel Prize winner (he wasn't, the organisation was, and I have edited the article to reflect this if kept.) As a point of comparison, Carlos Clemente Cerri another Brazilian scientist associated with the IPCC peace prize (per here), sadly passed away from cancer in 2017, and his passing was barely covered. I will note that many of the 14 Brazilian scientists associated with the IPCC in that blog post should probably have articles, but I'm not sure there's enough on Trindade to include him in that list. SportingFlyer  T · C  22:02, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I was the closer of the deletion review of this, which mostly covered the G4 speedy deletion of a recreation. I haven't really reached my own opinion on the article as yet, but there were a lot of significant opinions as to the validity of the original AfD, and as the participants of that have already been pinged, it feels appropriate to also ping the DRV participants who haven't participated here already. ~  mazca  talk 00:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The IPCC won half the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007. Now, of course, the award was for the reports.  The IPCC is an organization: it's made of pieces of paper and polite legal fictions.  It didn't write the reports.  People did that.  As of that time, Trindade was a "co-ordinating author": the most senior level of author in the IPCC.  I can make an arguable case that he's a Nobel laureate.  I know that there were more than 400 "co-ordinating authors", but if it's not them who won half the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, then nobody did.  (SportingFlyer's position is that nobody did win that prize, but I find that difficult to agree with.)  In any case, in our encyclopaedia where we're not allowed to delete articles about people whose "accomplishment" was to play professional sports in one event in 1967, townships in Where the Heck, Iowa (pop. 88) or that article about the precognitive octopus, to delete the article about this accomplished and well-regarded scientist of international importance is clearly perverse.—S Marshall T/C 01:54, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Rajendra K. Pachauri was the individual who accepted the 2007 NPP representing the IPCC. It is entirely possible for a notable organization to be comprised exclusively of non-notable individuals, even though all organizations are "pieces of paper and polite legal fictions". Our secondary guidelines exist to help our coverage of borderline-notable topics be more consistent. We aren't concerned here with the rightness or wrongness of non-applicable secondary guidelines, or whether we pay too much attention to athletes vs academics, or whether the subject's work was important or noble. VQuakr (talk) 05:20, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * It's not my position, it's a fact. See our article at 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, specifically the IPCC section along with the relevant reference, noting the award was not given to individuals associated with the IPCC. In Mr. Trindade's case, this makes sense, considering he just wrote a chapter of a report. SportingFlyer  T · C  09:34, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , you might not be concerned about whether our decisions are fair across fields or subject areas. I am.  WP:OTHERSTUFF is part of WP:ATA, which is an essay that I'm free to disregard.  ATA is just a laundry list of things some editors think other editors shouldn't be allowed to say at AfD, and I find a lot of its reasoning rather poor., sportspeople get awards based on the achievements of their team, not their individual accomplishments.  Why should scientists be treated differently?—S Marshall T/C 12:31, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, that's a straw man - not only did Trindade not win the award, he didn't get any coverage from the time the IPCC won the award. Sportspeople get articles because they get coverage for winning awards, not because they win awards, and good coverage is what we're lacking here. SportingFlyer  T · C  14:15, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, most sportspeople don't get good coverage at all. They get almanac-style entries in tables of results, which is no basis for a Wikipedia biography.—S Marshall T/C 13:43, 12 November 2020 (UTC)


 * IAR keep sources I can find might get to WP:N but if so, it's just barely. But yeah, I think we should have this. Hobit (talk) 06:47, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * In other words, we should keep this article because you like it. Methinks IAR demands a higher standard of relevance. — JFG talk 11:25, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Besides being part of the panel that was awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, Trindade held various positions of importance within UN commissions and there are several references to him before his death, such as for instance https://polarconnection.org/profiles-advisory-bo/sergio-c-trindade/ or http://webtv.un.org/watch/world-chronicle-253-sergio-trindade-centre-for-science-and-technology-for-development/5762415228001/?term= or https://www.unmultimedia.org/avlibrary/asset/2121/2121041/ or https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-45670-1_2 or https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/1326570 or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9RsPPGD69I.. --Pesqara (talk) 16:16, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, none of those appear to be independent coverage. SportingFlyer  T · C  16:38, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - The combination of a role on the work that resulted in the 2007 Nobel Prize and a distinguished academic career should be enough. That is the policy-based reason.  I will also add my personal opinion that sometimes deletion controversies make the subject famous for being famous, but the subject qualifies for inclusion anyway. Also concurring with comments of User:S Marshall. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:29, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 10:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete – However respectable this person's work is, it still fails the criteria for inclusion spelled out at WP:NACADEMICS. Neither can notability be inherited from the full IPCC organization, comprised of thousands of scientists, that received a Nobel Prize. The only new event since the first AfD reason Mr. Trindade received some attention in 2020 is that he died of COVID. Sadly that doesn't make him more notable. — JFG talk 11:23, 23 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - This article has been around for months and still is nothing more than a stub, and I'm not seeing mention of him in anything since his untimely death. While his death was unfortunate, being a member of the IPCC does not make you notable unto itself, nor does dying of COVID-19, and it seems that the brief spate coverage about him basically existed because of his death due to COVID rather than him being an overall notable figure. Titanium Dragon  (talk) 04:09, 24 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I would like to point out that your statements are incorrect. There are several mentions of him before his death (see links above in my previous comment); and, this article has not been around for months, since it was deleted shortly after its first creation and recreated (by me) just a few weeks ago. --Pesqara (talk) 17:40, 29 November 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete ultimately I just don't see that PROF, GNG, or BIO is met here. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  05:26, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. A quick search of google books for "Sérgio Trindade" indicates that he is frequently referenced in published books on renewable energy and food security.  Google doesn't give a good view of the contents of the books, and libraries are hard to access these days, but I think there is evidence to keeping the article even if it is hard to build it out right now.  Some sources are in Spanish.  I will put his article on the list of scientists needing improvement for the December Philadelphia WikiSalon. We have some Spanish speakers. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 19:18, 26 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. I find significant references and citations in numerous academic journals. He appears to be a recognized subject matter expert in his field, and with the direct association to the Nobel Peace Prize, I see no issue in satisfying notability. This article is well referenced - O Globo should certainly count as a reliable secondary source.--Concertmusic (talk) 18:16, 29 November 2020 (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.