Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Pedro Perebal

Reply to Thinker78
To address your questions and comments after my !vote: See Staszek Lem's comment below mine. You may be over-interpreting "event". "Learned 10 [really 6] languages" (and not otherwise noteworthy) is a feat, an achievement, which is a kind of event. It's not quite the same kind of event as winning an election or putting on a performance, or dying in a landslide, but it's still a discretely definable goalpost on a timeline. List: If the inclusion criteria at the list article are that tight, then oh well. Someone who knows 6 languages and has picked up smatterings of a few more isn't an encyclopedia topic.

I think this comes down to a WP:NOT policy matter, if the WP:N analysis seems borderline. The same sources already cited later doing some followup/rehash pieces on the same subject don't really qualify as additional sources for WP:N analysis. Do newspapers or TV shows in Tokyo, Johannesburg, or Toronto write about this guy? Prensa Libre and ChapinTV are basically local coverage. They're Spanish-language media in Guatemala, which has a total Spanish-speaking population (including as a second language) of about 9 mil, 25% of whom are illiterate (lowest literacy rate in Central America), and over 50% below the poverty line (i.e. with limited access to or time for TV or Internet video shows, and probably a below-average interest in trivial news stories). But let's pretend for a moment that all 9 mil are legitimately the target audience. That's comparable to the populations of single Latin American cities such as Bogotá, Mexico City, and Lima.

We've long had a problem of how to really interpret, reason about, and apply the WP:Systemic bias page (which is probably why it's still an essay): "national" coverage of something isn't equivalent across all nations, nor across all categories. We treat "national" as equivalent for certain things (e.g. the head of state of the tiny island nation of Tonga is presumptively notable as a head of state, period), but there's a huge difference between, say, the no. 1 weight lifter or the actor with the most national awards in the United States or Russia or India, on the one hand, and "equivalent" titles in Liechtenstein or New Guinea – they're not equivalent or even meaningfully comparable. Virtually no one but some Liechtensteiners will care about Liechtensteinian acting awards. Virtually no one cares who speaks the most languages in Guatemala (and it's not even a claim made about Perebal). Quasi-famous in national Guatemalan coverage for something trivial, in the public-sphere sense (I'm not mocking personal achievement), isn't really comparable to quasi-famous for something like that in national media of China or Spain.

But we should have fewer "15 minutes of fame" articles of any kind anyway, no matter how big the background population of the subject or how large the market of the sources. The difficulty of creating a guideline like WP:N and having it be always practical is why we have so many subject-specific notability guidelines and why WP:NOT and related passages remain policy. Sometimes the WP:GNG rule of thumb doesn't fit, and there's skepticism here that case passes GNG at all. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  00:26, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * There's some additional BIO1E analysis at User talk:5 albert square.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  07:04, 1 June 2018 (UTC)