Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adonai Rocha

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. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:08, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adonai Rocha

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Disputed prod. As discussed at Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Adonai_Rocha, promotional tone issues could be fixed, but as noted by Bishonen this is essentially an unsourced BLP (none of the sources discuss him in general) created by a WP:COI account. Dweller (talk) 21:30, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The sources are a trainwreck as I detailed here. I note the SPA account who created the article has removed the prod template without explanation and without adding sources. This is permitted, but that's not to say it's ideal. I hope, if there are actual third-party sources out there, he's encouraged by this AfD to find them and add them. Bishonen | talk 22:37, 20 February 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete. I've added two references, one from MAM Rio and one about awards from World Monuments Fund official flickr account. None of them can actually support notability. The problem is may be we missing some reference on Portuguese, so may be worth getting someone who can read and understand Portuguese. Also, the article has some serious claims about him being exhibited in "prestigious galleries and museums". In such cases I would expect quite a lot of independent reviews in media, which I can't find, unfortunately Arthistorian1977 (talk) 13:04, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Notability for a living person should be a whole lot more obvious than it is in this case. giso6150 (talk) 21:31, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:32, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.