Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ulisses Soares (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 keep. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:20, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Ulisses Soares
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Qualifies for deletion per WP:BLP1E. The only significant coverage about the subject is about him becoming the first South American apostle of the LDS church. Other coverage in independent, reliable sources is limited to minor pasing mentions within the context of routine event coverage and plain name checks, none of which establish notability per Wikipedia's standards of notability. North America1000 09:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America1000 09:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep Every single member of the Quorum of the 12 apostles has an article. There is continuing and widespread coverage. I will demonstrate more when I have time. This is not in any way a one event coverage situation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 10:46, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment I have not even begun to dig to find all the sources on Elder Soares two temple dedications, which is higher than most current members of the Quorum of the 12. However even this article is 2 and a half months after his call. It alone defeats 1 event. 1 event has to be one time, not coverage spread over months.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:00, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Here is another article on Soares published almost 3 months after his call as an apostle in a publication in no way tied to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. This level of coverage goes way beyond any understanding of one event notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:39, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: Being one of the top 15 leaders of the Church does indeed in and of itself make Soares notable, as does the fact that, since his ordination as such, he has fulfilled more official roles normally carried out by the Church President or his counselors in two years than some of his fellow apostles have filled in 5 years, which is what Johnpacklambert was clearly trying to convey in his last comment. Additionally, an argument can be made that targeting the article of an apostle from an ethnic minority among top leadership could, by Wikipedia's definition, be considered to be action taken on the basis of of racist motivations, which shows clear bias on the part of the nominator. I realize that last statement may be me personally failing to assume good faith, but based on past interactions with this nominator, I have precious little reason to even attempt to do so. User:Johnpacklambert is making an earnest effort on his part to address the issues. While he (and perhaps others) do so, I'd recommend pausing this discussion, but again know the nominator's history well enough to recognize that that won't be something they'd be amenable to. --Jgstokes (talk) 02:12, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment – Wow, really, you're calling me a racist for nominating an article for deletion. This article was not "targeted" based upon anyone's ethnicity; it was nominated for deletion because source searches were only providing BLP1E sources. I have disclosed on my user page using a userbox the I reside in the United States, but you seem to assume that I am a non-minority, but you don't know me. What if I am latino, would it then be okay in your view to nominate the article for deletion? Or, if I am white, would it be off limits to nominate an article about someone who is latino? Should nominators at AfD have to state their ethnicity to get your approval about whether or not to nominate an article for deletion? I see no reason for me announce my ethnicity to obtain your approval. Your WP:ASPERSIONS are nonsensical, and incredibly inappropriate. Furthermore, your baseless assertions of racism are wrong, vulgar and constitute a personal attack, and I ask that you immediately redact your obscene comment about me above. You are not only entirely wrong, you are entirely incorrect in making such an assertion about another user in such an obtuse, flip and disturbing manner. You need to abide by WP:NPA and stop posting personal attacks. North America1000 09:37, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * No one has ever before seen such in depth articles in multiple national publications of someone who is assuming a life-long leadership position as an indication of one event coverage. The articles are not the type that is so cliassified, and we can show that all apostles get this level of coverage. Temple dedications were historcally lead by the president of the Church or one of his counselors. The fact that Soares has lead 2 puts him as one of the apostles who has lead more than normal.John Pack Lambert (talk) 11:48, 14 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Here is an article that shows international coverage of Soares. I have found another source on Soares doing a tour of Central America which is from a publication that is without question indepdent.John Pack Lambert (talk) 11:54, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment To understand why all members of the Quorum of the Twelve of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have articles it is neccesary to understand their position in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. The Quorum of the Twelve Apostles and First Presidency are all sustained twice a year in general conference of the Church as prophets, seers and revelators. They are also sustained as such annually in over 3,000 stake conference and over 30,000 ward and branch conferences. Many members of the Church seek to memorize all their names. Even I who is the person who cares the most have never tried to memorize all the names of the General Authrity Seventy. The First Presidency and the quorum of the 12 hold weekly meetings deliberating on the affairs of the Church. They also with the presiding bishopric form the council on the distribution of tithes which makes the decisions on the monetary actions of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. Many major decisions of The Church are only made after unanimous support of the entire First Presidency and Council of the 12. Each member of the quorum of the twelve when they are physically able gives a talk a general conference. While other general authorities talk there as well, they do not talk as often. Many of the travels, especially international travels of the apostles will be written in the Church News in a way that other church leaders do not get as much coverage. The main committees and councils of the Church all have apostles as their leaders, even though many will have non-apostle members. The council on the twice monthly lessons and Melchizedek Priesthood and Relief Society meetings of the Church emphasizes that in general it should be the talks of members of the First Presidency and quorum of the 12 that should be studied. While the other general authorities and general officers of the Church are important to governance and administration, the apostles have a uniquely impactful role.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:17, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Per brilliant analysis by . Celestina007 (talk) 12:29, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note that in February 2020 when Soares toured Central America one week meeting with the President of Guatemala and the next the head of the legislature in Costa Rica, two weeks in a row the Salt Lake Tribune, which is fully and totally indepdent of (and often down right hostile towards) The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, two weeks in a row had articles on what Soares was doing. I have to wonder if I was doing better searches if I could find at least a Spanish-language article on Soares meeting with the president of Guatemala.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:29, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Here is an article six months after their call as apostles that puts Gong and Soares at the center of its broad historical analysis. This is not the type of thing that is meant to be covered by BLP1E. It is also from a publication in no way owned or controlled by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:37, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I found it this article from Guatemala connected with Elder Soares ministry visit there, where he met with the Preisdnet of Guatemala. My Spanish is less than adequate, so I am not sure if it mentions the meeting with the president of Guatemala. It does have a whole biographical side bar giving all the details of Elder Soares' life though.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:56, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * The source is considered one of the Guatemalan newspapers of record per our article on it in Wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:59, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I have now added the Prensa Libre article. I have also added an article from El Mundo in El Salvador. This is one of that country's substantial papers. As far as I can tell the article is entirely focused on Soares' actions. The last paragraph gives a biography of him.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:11, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * We now have substantial articles on Soares from major publications in at least 3 countries over a period of at least 22 months.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:14, 14 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment "The Deseret News is a subsidiary of the Deseret Management Corporation, which is owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" so it's not independent of the subject. I cannot verify the independence of the other sources, but most that I gave a cursory glance toward, were not. I'm also not confinved by the "every Quorum of the 12 apostles" argument, and that can be reduced to WP:OSE. If the other eleven need to be added to a list that discusses who the current dozen to simplify the project, that would be fine. With that said, WP:CLERGY seems clear and this subject qualifies. The article should be trimmed to focus only on the subject, but the subject meets notability criteria. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:25, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment, forgive my ignorance, but can a helpful editor, hi, let us know at what equivalent "level" Soares would be in  say the protestant, and/or catholic churches ie. bishop, archb, primate, patriarch, cardinal? such a clarification may assist editors in their considerations (well, it will help me anyway:)). thanks. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:42, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per Johnpacklamberts analysis and followups proving it meets WP:GNG. --  Dane talk  19:30, 17 July 2020 (UTC)  As an Apostle Soares would be at about the same level as a Cardinal in the Roman Catholic church.  When he was in the Seventy he would be considered to be at about the same level as an Arch-Bishop in the Catholic church.  I hope that helps you. hhhobbit (talk) 17:23, 19 July 2020 (UTC)
 * In some ways the Seventy are like the Cardinals, in other ways the Cardinal/Apostle equivalency makes sense. The key to all of this is that apostles are looked to in super normative ways that one does not find in the Catholic Church. The twice annual general conferences have a normative power and participation level for the worldwide Church membership in ways that there is no equvalent event in any other Church, let alone in Catholicism. Some Protestant bodies have worldwide conferences, but they are more policy making conventions as opposed to doctrine dispensing ones.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:50, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep/Draftify - technical BLP1E applies to low profile individuals and is not a test of notability. My understanding of BLP1E is though frequently misapplied. The main reason for it is to protect low profile individuals rather than show someone isn't notable. Those who are not low profile are not clearly subject to the rule per the policy and supplemental explainer. BIO1E applies when there is a different event to merge to but I don't see an obvious one here. If the individual is notable in one event that is enough I would change if evidence were presented that it wasnt notable. I am unconvinced by the argument that this position alone is enough to overide GNG. Accusing anyone of being racist is completely unacceptable behaviour and I do not see it at all. The sourcing and article is weak puffery at best and independent sources need to be included. The nomination is completely reasonable a/draftify should remain a consideration even now. That statement should be withdrawn, and I would suggest the closer discounts the opinion for violating policy. The nominator would be well within their rights to ask for a ban on that IMO. PainProf (talk) 14:31, 18 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You are calling articles in The New York Times weak puffery? There are sources from papers of record in both El Salvador and Guatemala. There are many totally and completely independent sources. The position is one where the person is sustained as a prophet, seer and revelator and apostle in over 35000 meetings annually. This is a position where in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints they are looked to as a key leader. This is ages better coverage than exists for the vast majority of articles we have in Wikipedia period. There are few individuls that we have articles covering their actions from at least 4 countries, and 3 of them in papers of record in that country. To even suggest draftifying the article is ludicrous.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * No it relies too heavily on church sources. IMO church sources are not reliable for even biographical details because they frequently make outlandish biographical claims about figures both current and historical based off religious beliefs. As such articles that rely too heavily on these sources may be in whole or in part untrue. If we are neutral to religious beliefs then we should be careful. Maybe we should have an RFC on the use of church of LDS sources for biographical details. For instance Joseph Smith's claims about the book of Mormon are not necessarily accurate biographical details (I mean no disrespect and make no claims to your beliefs here). In smaller religions there is sometimes a tendency towards revisionism and grandeur as the religion grows. Similar to all young religions there are changes in narrative over time a rewriting of history to tend towards greater organisation or historical continuity. I think it isn't apt to compare to a cardinal there are 221 Cardinals but 1.2 billion Catholics. There are as many as 16 million LDS adherents. Numbers are necessary for context here. PainProf (talk) 14:31, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * You come off as extremely disreespectful. Your attempt to mass exclude "Church sources" is a total act of bigortry. Both the Church News and The Ensign seek for accuracy in what they publish. Your statement reeks of bigotry and hatre, and you have zero reasons to impune the well written and research sourcing that is involved here. Your comment comes across as advocating for bigoted exclusion of people who come from religions that you dislike. The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints runs a very large history department and the operations of the Church Historian Press are such that it is a top respected publisher. Your hatred of the Book of Mormon should not be used as an excuse to exclude all articles on leaders who spend their time and energy spreading its message. Currently we treat all Episcopal Bishops as default notable, there are 1.8 million Episcopalians, so this works out to one bishop per 18,000 Episcopalians. With The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints there is less than one apostle per 1 million members. I have seen Episcopal Bishop articles kept on the sourcing of one article on the level of the articles we have on Soares from El Salvador and Guatemala. In no other case have I ever seen persistence in arguing sourcing is inadequate when we have sourcing from at least 4 nations spread out well over 2 years.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:23, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment Comparisons of any office in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints to anything in Catholicism miss the centralized nature of how The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is run, as opposed to the way the Catholic Church is run. In Catholicism the only real power of the Cardinals is to appoint a new pope. The actual running of the Church is done by the Roman Curia. In many ways the way the First Presidency and Quorum of the 12 operate is as if the College of Cardinals and Roman Curia were one and the same body. Thus Elder Soares serves not only on the Quorum of the 12 which with the First Presidency deliberates on most central matters of Church governannce, and in many policy changes must reach a unanimous agreement to proceed with the First Presidency, but he also serves as a member of the Missionary Executive Committee and of the Church's Human Resources Committee.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:05, 20 July 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.