Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Santiago (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. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 12:40, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Tony Santiago

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Fails WP:NOTE, violates WP:NOR, cites other Wikipedia articles, and basically all around reads like a POV homemade family website, which is to be expected due to conflict of interest. Cirt (talk) 00:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Just a quick note to avoid confusion - this isn't the second nomination of the current article; the previous nomination dealt with an entirely different article at the same title. Shimgray | talk | 00:38, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —Cirt (talk) 00:27, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  —Cirt (talk) 00:27, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  —Cirt (talk) 00:27, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions.  —Cirt (talk) 00:27, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep: Recognition from a national government (Puerto Rico) does provide notability for subject. --XLR8TION (talk) 00:24, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep: Per above, government recognition should be enough to provide notability. --Pyho T / C 00:34, 23 October 2009 (UTC) Delete: While the topic does fall under the scope of WP:ACADEMIC, as Cirt stated, it does not provide sufficient reliable sources. --Pyho T / C 01:16, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't see enough to satisfy that the topic has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Cirt (talk) 00:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, I wrote this article because of my father's national and international notable accomplishements which have been featured in the news. How many of us have been honored, by the Puerto Rican government, who considers him amongst their best military historians, U.S. Congress, the U.S. military and so on? Antonio Martin (talk) 00:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This article has never been nominated for deletion. The nominator confused ny father with a wrestler. Antonio Martin (talk) 00:37, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I see lots of primary sources, links to Wikipedia itself, and sources affiliated with the subject. I don't see any significant coverage in independent reliable secondary sources. Cirt (talk) 00:41, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Resolution of the Senate of Puerto Rico #3603 Reference: In spanish PDF. Thank you- Antonio Martin (talk) 01:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note, I would like to present the image of Senate Resolution presented to him by the Puerto Rican Senate during a tribute:
 * Could you perhaps just link to the image, instead of displaying the entire thing in the AFD discussion? Cirt (talk) 01:07, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You could have done it yourself, as I just did... Its a wiki anyone can edit, after all...--Cerejota (talk) 01:16, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Primary sources or not, the number of recognitions and awards that Tony has received by military, social and political organizations is more than enough to warrant notability. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  01:13, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete The only independent/reliable source is the Arizona Post. The other websites are not proper newspapers, they are ad hoc publications with the stated aim of promoting Hispanics. Secondly this article gives the feel that the subject is an academic historian, but he is not, he writes for Hispanic advocacy outlets.  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) 01:18, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Again, if you feel that the article has issues, edit it, anyone can do it. However, the subject does meet the very first point of WP:BIO's additional criteria: "The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for one". -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  01:22, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * There is no proof of this. In Australian Parliament, the local member routinely makes congratulatory motions praising the local priest, community activist, all the time, and all the others agree all the time, as there is no harm in doing so and they would only lose votes by doing otherwise. They go to the local ethnic club, church etc and do a lot of these each year. None of the other stuff like writing for a small advocate/club newspaper with a pre-determined mission of promoting an ethnic group count. They also go and congratulate school students in their electoral district for winning competitions exams etc. Being congratulated in parliament is not proof of notability, otherwise, everyone who wins prizes in Year 12, or gets selected for their country in a youth sports team or an International Science Olympiad will become notable. The only way to edit this article is to remove all the content, ie delete.  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) 01:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * So, what makes you think that the Resolution is the only recognition that he has received? And what makes you say that he has only received awards from "ethnic groups"? You are not familiar with the article's subject. As a matter of fact, you only seem to be backing up your friend Cirt in the very same way way that I'm backing Tony, with the main difference being that I actually avoided a COI by not "voting". -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  01:45, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * YellowMonkey: even if we accept your vie that Tony is an "advocate for Hispanics", this wouldn't be a reason to establish unsuitability to be covered. There are hundreds of BLPs for people who are amateur and/or partisan researches or historians. Chip Berlet for example. So this opposition is not how the community has defined notability.
 * The second part is a false analogy: the recognition that Tony received was not of the type you mention. I recognize that you might not be convinced to keep, but in arguing for deletion, please do not use false analogies or false claims: Tony's recognition by the PR Senate was a high honor, and was not given lightly by the PR Senate. It was not comparable to the "standard" recognitions a school team might get for pedestrian reasons. That said, this is not the only criteria of notability that has been given, so it should only be considered part of the reasons why this article must be included.--Cerejota (talk) 01:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - Notability is not solely established by secondary source coverage, objective criteria like awards, being voted into office (even if there is no significant coverage in secondary sources) etc is also used for notability. This is a BLP and there are plenty of BLPs, in particular sports figures and local politicians, that lack a wealth of secondary sources. Methinks that Cirt is giving a bureaucratic reading to the content rules: the idea is to keep out material that doesn't enrich the encyclopedia, and to keep the encyclopedia from being a list of everyone. In this case, deletion is not warranted, and while the article could be improved upon, it represents an addition that is both encyclopedic and notable. Tony Santiago is the premier amateur military historian on Puerto Rican and Hispanic/Latino affairs, and as sourced, has been recognized by private and public sources as such. It seems to be that the nominator should have made an effort to improve the perceived issues with the article before nomination for deletion.


 * Lastly, a very serious accusation of COI is made against a long-time editor and administrator in good standing. I suggest the nominator either retract this bad faith accusation or raise it at WP:COI, but it is certainly very unproductive and calls into question the purity of intent of the nominator. One could equally argue that it seems that the nominator has some sort of personal vendetta against Tony Santiago, for whatever reason.--Cerejota (talk) 01:29, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, this is obvious. The author is the subject's son, and the subject has also edited the article.  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) 01:30, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * That is not a COI violation: both facts are well known to the community and in particular to those of us in WP:PUR under which this BLP falls. Any issues of COI would have been swiftly dealt with. Again, deletion is not the answer, in any case editing is. I to wish that the sourcing be improved, but if minor porn stars from Japan have wikipedia articles, I do certainly think Tony Santiago should be covered by the encyclopedia. --Cerejota (talk) 01:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Not to mention that the talk page has the notice box on this. In other words, COI should be raised in an AFD as an element for deletion only if this is a significant factor in the quality of the article, or if the only reason it is included is because of COI. That is not the case here, and coupled with other quacking on the part of the nominator, I am not sure I can seriously view this as a good faith nomination. Of course we AGF, but we are also not stupid or made of rock.--Cerejota (talk) 02:08, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * if minor porn stars from Japan have wikipedia articles, I do certainly think Tony Santiago should be covered by the encyclopedia.. Comparing the notability of a porn star to this is completely bewildering. &mdash;Dark 02:44, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep per Cerejota. Although I do agree with the words penned by YellowMonkey, I feel that the wiki would be better for having this article, not deleting it. 129.108.69.234 (talk) 01:47, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Antonio Martin (talk) 02:42, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - It is common knowledge that with time sources cease to exsist or are moved. I wrote this article with good-faith and therefore I am presenting here the reliable sources which have moved and which no doubt proof his notability:
 * "Phoenix Republic" - Author details contributions of Puerto Ricans, by Alison Stanton
 * Tony "The Marine" Santiago becomes official ANSO Historian
 * Primera Hora (Puerto Rico Newspaper-"El clan Clinton en el Capitolio"
 * The Arizona Republic-"A medal, a debt, both of honor", by John Faherty
 * Plus, I would like to add as further evidence of his notability the following official documents, which were provided among the inter-wikilinks of the article:

It should not be diffcult to understand that a former head of state, former President of the United States Bill Clinton, New York State Senator Hilary Clinton (a presidential candidate at the time) and the President of the Puerto Rican Senate would not pose with my father for an official photograph, unless he were notable. Thank you Antonio Martin (talk) 04:47, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Image:2Resolution 3603.jpg-Resolution of the Senate of Puerto Rico #3603
 * File:USMC_Letter.jpg-Unofficial Letter of appreciation from the USMC.
 * File:Discurso del Senado.jpg-Speech made before the Senate of Puerto Rico in 2007, by then President of the Puerto Rican Senate and now Lt. governor of Puerto Rico, the Honorable Kenneth McClintock.
 * File:Memorial Day (2008) Speech.jpg-Speech made in 2008, where the Puerto Rican Government paid tribute to my father in the presence of former U.S. President Bill Clinton and his wife former New York State Senator Hilary Clinton.
 * File:Speech by Luis Fortuno.jpg-by then U.S. Congressman and now governor of Puerto Rico Luis Fortuno, in recognizing my father.
 * Its fair to note that Primera Hora is one of Puerto Rico's main newspapers, along El Nuevo Día and El Vocero. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  03:20, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep I don't see the big issue about COI here, anyone can edit the article, for example Yellow Monkey edited the article to erase the word historian to describe Tony because he was  "promoting Hispanics, this is advocacy not history". The Senate of Puerto Rico and the current governor of Puerto Rico seems to disagree with Monkey: "Mr. President, I am also pleased that you are honoring former Marine Antonio Santiago, who has devoted himself to preserving the history and accomplishments of Puerto Ricans in the U.S. military" (quote from a speech from the current governor of Puerto Rico Luis_Fortuno, 1) Notability here is not only established by official government recognition  but by multiple reliable sources including "Phoenix Republic", and a major newspaper in Puerto Rico Primera Hora. --Jmundo (talk) 04:27, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * weak Keep but only if reduced to an appropriate length.    DGG ( talk ) 04:48, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per Cerejota. Improve instead of delete. Also, we should read the spirit of the law, in which Tony Santiago is surely notable, and while we could use some more and some better refs, it's well established who he is, what he's done, and why that's notable. I dismiss the COI claims because the aticle has been edited by a number of unrelated editors. And I'm loathe to assume bad faith, I do smell the odor of a game being played... I could be wrong.  bahamut0013  words deeds 04:50, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * It seems that yellow monkey has started a personal vendetta against an establish editor, please see his edit and bad faith edit summaries (Oct 23)contributions. --Jmundo (talk) 05:50, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not the one adding myself all over Wikipedia. I am not breaking the spam rules. I'm not interested in this red herring, although I'm well aware that on Wikipedia, right or wrong doesn't determine the outcome. IF If I add photos of myself all over wikipedia articles, feel free to block me.  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket ) 06:08, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * yes, Im aware that you are not the one researching and writing hundreds of articles about the history of Puerto Rico, you seem to be the type of editor ready to make your point outside the AfD discussion .--Jmundo (talk) 06:33, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Jmundo, watch it when you accuse an arbitrator of disruption to make a point and having a personal vendetta, especially with meagre and unsubstantial proof. Your involvement here is counter-productive, therefore I'll request you to recuse yourself from this discussion. Your escalation of this issue is quite disappointing. &mdash;Dark 10:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete think the dude is awesome, but I really fail to see the notability beyond self-reference to this website -- Samir 06:30, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * You might have missed that Primera Hora is a major newspaper. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  01:57, 24 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. No disrespect to Tony or his son, who has obviously put a substantial amount of time and effort into the article, but I am not convinced he meets the notability guidelines for biographies or has enough reliably published sources on him. Quoting or citing Wikipedia articles is not acceptable. To me, this article seems to signify that if one is an editor of Wikipedia, or a blogger, then one is notable enough for inclusion, which is definitely not true. There is also a strong conflict of interest concern, and I would suggest that if this article is kept, Tony and his son either refrain from editing the page, or show a high amount of restraint when editing it. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 06:45, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Recognition and honors by the Puerto Rican government plus coverage in several major newspapers would confirm WP:BIO requirements. However, I agree with DGG about editing the article into something much shorter. Warrah (talk) 19:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Anyone can edit the article per DGG's suggestions, but the subject has been publicly honored and has received press coverage. - Mtmelendez (Talk) 22:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, due to WP:COI, and insufficient coverage to meet basic criteria for WP:BIO. Although the individual has received awards (they in and of themselves are not significant enough to be considered "multiple independent sources" (a couple more might increase it to meet the criteria)), the majority of sources are primary.  Although I have nothing against the subject of the article, and think that he is doing a fine job in being an advocate for Hispanics in the military. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:23, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Article passes both conditions for which it was nominated. It could be edited for improvement as per suggestions already mentioned but deletion is not justified. ~ RayLast  « Talk! » 21:28, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

1. Resolution of the Senate of Puerto Rico #3603 Image:2Resolution 3603.jpg an important honor bestowed upon him in 2007, by the Government of Puerto Rico, making him the first known person to be honored by a government for his work in "Wikipedia" File:Tony with Representatives2.jpg. He is notable enough to have been included in a Memorial Day speech made by the President of the Puerto Rican Senate and transmitted by radio stating how through Wikipedia he helped in identifying various soldiers of Puerto Rican descent whose names were to be inscribed in “The Monument of Rememberance” File:Discurso del Senado.jpg.
 * Comment - Here are the facts, not only do we have reliable verifiable sources, among them the “Phoenix Republic”, The Association of Naval Officers , Primera Hora Newspaper   and the Arizona Republic   plus we also have the official documents and photographs as evidence of his notability, as a reminder the documents and photographs are  reliable sources.

2. He is notable enough to have been once again included in the 2008, Memorial Day Speech by the government File:Memorial Day (2008) Speech.jpg, to be presented an award this time by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, the Honorable Jose Aponte File:Apnote, Tony and McClintock.jpg and important enough for the former President of the United States Bill Clinton and family to take an official photo with him during his tribute in the State Capital File:Tony and Clintons2.jpg.

3. He is notable enough to be referred to in speech by a member of the "United States Congress", Congressman Luis Fortuno File:Speech by Luis Fortuno.jpg.

4. To receive a United States Marine Corps Unofficial Letter of appreciation for his work in Wikipedia File:USMC_Letter.jpg.

5. And to be awarded the Joint Task Force Commander's Coin File:Joint Task Force Commander's Coin for Excellence.jpg and Certificate for Excellence File:Certificate JTF Guantanamo.jpg by the Deputy Commander of the Joint Task Force Guantanamo, which is an impact award given by the Joint Task Force Commander to those soldiers and civilians he deems worthy of immediate recognition. 

He did not seek these recognitions, which were bestowed upon him before I wrote his article. However, I did so because I truly believe that he is notable and the newspapers, photographs and documents which I have provided should serve as proof to that fact. As Dark stated above: if minor porn stars from Japan have wikipedia articles, I do certainly think Tony Santiago should be covered by the encyclopedia.. Comparing the notability of a porn star to this is completely bewildering. Thank you, Antonio Martin (talk) 09:27, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Antonio, you seemed to have misinterpreted the comment. I am saying that because something else on Wikipedia has not been deleted, that does not make this article any more notable, hence my link to WP:WAX. And the comparison was a quote of Cerejota's original comment. &mdash;Dark 06:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Question - has Tony commented either way as to whether this article should be kept or not? - A l is o n  ❤ 01:47, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Tony says "To tell you the truth, I don't mind if the article about me is deleted, it happens." John Vandenberg (chat) 02:26, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * It is nice to have an article written about you, especially if it is written by one's son, but who am I to determine if I am notable or not? It isn't up to me. If the article is deleted, I will continue to be myself, it happens. Tony the Marine (talk) 03:59, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Comment, yes Cyclopia, I totally agree with you. If the article is kept I will stay out of it and request that my father do the same, thereby eliminating the COI issue. I will keep a watch for any vandalism which may come up, and handle it just as I would any other article. Antonio Martin (talk) 21:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - per Warrah and Bahamut, Cerejota. When one of our own receives recognition from the world we record, we should be glad that our work is being noted for positive reasons, and not just the usual scandals.  We record what the world records, and if it records one of us sufficiently or notably, we should record him or her as well.  These stellar contributions have made Wikipedia highly relevant to an entire island nation and its diaspora.  It's important that people can learn, neutrally, about the author.  Like the Puerto Rican government and people, I also say thank you for this hard work.  -- >David  Shankbone  02:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems to meet a minimal threshold for notability. Everyking (talk) 05:06, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Reluctant keep - It is a terrible vanity page now. But it seems to pass the threshold for notability, and so the page should stay. I hope someone with less COI can help on it. -- Cycl o pia talk 20:23, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand how difficult is to deal with such a situation, and I don't think you should be shut out of editing -after all, you can help finding sources etc. I hope only that someone else with some knowledge of the subject steps in (I am not that someone, unfortunately), to help maintain the article in an unbiased state. I appreciate extremly your objective and professional comment. -- Cycl o pia talk 22:35, 26 October 2009 (UTC)


 * weak delete I'm just not seeing this individual as meeting WP:BIO. The subject comes across as a successful individual but nothing that makes him especially notable such a multiple, non-trivial reliable sources. Having one's picture taken with a President or having been mentioned in a speech by a congressperson simply doesn't cut that. We need sources and I'm not seeing them here. JoshuaZ (talk) 02:15, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

1. The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for one.
 * Observation & comment It isn't as simple as having an official photo taken with not only a former U.S. President and his wife who at the time was the Presidential candidate of her party (notice that the subject was positioned in the middle) nor a simple mention by U.S. Congressman. From: WP:BIO.

The Resolution bestowed upon the subject by the Government of Puerto Rico is a notable award and recognition which required the approval by vote of the majority of the members of said legislative organization and is not given to just anyone. The section "Resuelvese Por El Senado De Puerto Rico" states the following: "1. The Senate of Puerto Rico would like to express it's recognition and appreciation of Mr. Antonio Santiago for his disinterested dedication to the cause of informing, through the news means of electronics, information in regard to distinguished Puerto Ricans, particularly those who served with distinction in our military."

2. Sources

The resolution document Image:2Resolution 3603.jpg is a secondary source and not a primary source because it is not a document created by such a person (subject). Plus, the following is a newspaper source written by someone not related to the subject. "Phoenix Republic" - Author details contributions of Puerto Ricans, by Alison Stanton.

His recognition's came about as a result of being a "Wikipedian" and should serve as an inspiration to us all that our work here does make a difference. I mean, just think about this for a moment, how many "Wikipedians" have been honored and received an important award by a government or whatever for his/her work in Wikipedia? Antonio Martin (talk) 00:26, 29 October 2009 (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.