Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alejandro Almeida

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. A lot of text, but at the end it looks like this is just a hoax. Sandstein 17:41, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alejandro Almeida (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

This article appears to be of a non notable minor public figure who may or may not exist. It has zero sources, and I was unable to locate any even after conducting a thorough WP:BEFORE search. The only references I could find to it anywhere where Wikipedia mirrors and a reference to a fictional character with the same name and general description (Havana born Castro acquaintance living in Florida) from a video game. In addition, I am concerned about the lack of citations in a WP:BLP. Michepman (talk) 14:29, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

NOMINATOR COMMENT: Here’s the fictional character I could find with that name. Some of the biographical details from the article match this person: https://godfather.fandom.com/wiki/Alejandro_Almeida The rest of the article appears to have been clumsily plagiarized from Bill Gunter, and the editor who did it forgot to change the names after cut and pasting (see the last paragraph, which refers to Gunter by name). I’m assuming good faith that this was an honest mistake/typo, but it still makes me suspect that this person is not truly notable. Michepman (talk) 14:35, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:21, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 16:21, 9 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete nothing comes close to a claim of notability, and we lack any indication of anything hat even proves this person is real.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:41, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep - Not so sure at this point; the sourcing in the article is really weak but there are a few sources available online that the nominator missed/ignored:

^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}

EDIT: I've made significant revisions and improvements to the article, and I now believe that this article should be speedy kept. It's clear now that there are significant evidence of notability and reliable sources available and a large portion of these are now transcluded. Nominator should withdraw this nom ASAP. 107.77.203.73 (talk) 13:58, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I’m not too impressed by the quality of those sources. No disrespect meant, but I had a tough time finding any meaningful corroboration of the article’s claims in the linked sources. Michepman (talk) 22:30, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Personal websites and company profiles fall well short of being considered reliable sources, especially when none of them appear to be about this Alejandro Almeida that was born in 1926. Best, GPL93 (talk) 04:33, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment The article does appear to be fully sourced as of the above revisions. It's not as thoroughly sourced as I would prefer to see but it's enough to fulfill the notability/verifiability standards. As a reminder to the deletionists -- it's important to base votes on the article subject's notability, NOT on the quality of the article as written (which admittedly was very poor). A current or former member of the United States Congress clearly meets the requirements of WP:NPOL -- to wit: Politicians and judges who have held international, national, or sub-national (e.g., province- or state-wide) office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels. Please, please, PLEASE carefully review and understand these policies before weighing in on these types of discussions in the future. 107.77.204.106 (talk) 12:58, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To start, you can comment as much as you'd like but you only get one vote. Almeida NEVER served in the United States Congress. He does not have an entry in the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress (which has an entry on every member of Congress since 1774) nor can I find election records that indicate he ran for an office of any kind. Additionally, you have not even proved that this guy actually exists. Of the three sources in the article, two are about a very much alive Spanish Microsoft employee and the other is a personal website for a very much alive Spanish photographer and the only additional source you have provided in this AfD is an IMDB page for someone who started his acting career in 2018 Eight years after the Alejandro Almeida in question died. To be frank, do not accuse other editors of not knowing or ignoring Wikipedia's policies when you either do not care enough to check your sources and know what are and are not reliable or are actively trying to pass off sourcing about other people by the same name to try to deceive other editors. Best, GPL93 (talk) 14:15, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're missing the point. I fully agree that the article is not in good shape and was in worse shape even before my recent edits. There are numerous factual errors that still need to be ironed out (incl. the claim of Rep. Almeida's death in 2010).That is not in dispute. What IS in dispute is your inadvertent misapprehension of the notability of Congressman Almeida. As referenced above, there are plenty of sources that may be used to corroborate his notability. I will remind you again that, per NPOL, all statewide and federal lawmakers in the US are presumed notable. You may disagree with the quality of Almeida's article, and I don't dispute that it requires significant more work to be of useful quality, but unless you have consensus to revise WP:NPOL then your argument that Almeida is not notable falls flat. 107.77.204.106 (talk) 14:21, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any proof he served in Congress? Because I can't find any record of him serving in Congress, I can't even find basic election records. It's not about quality of article, you can't just say "this guy was a congressman" without a shred of proof and just expect an article to stay up. GPL93 (talk) 14:27, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - definitely agree that the sourcing is not very strong, but this person is a US Congressman and those are presumed notable. Clearly meets the WP:GNG. 14:09, 16 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.185.237.210 (talk)

Welcome to Wikipedia, interesting first edit. Have you any proof Almeida actually served in the United States Congress. GPL93 (talk) 14:16, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've been on Wikipedia before. As far as Almeida goes, no, I took it on faith that he was a member of Congress since this was stated in the article. If he is not a member of Congress as you claim above then I lean towards Delete as the rest of his career (as described in the article) does not seem especially noteworthy. 14:23, 16 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.185.237.210 (talk)

Update - GPL93 (talk · contribs), 107.77.204.106 (talk · contribs) I just looked this guy up and it looks like he might be a fictional character from a video game. See here: https://godfather.fandom.com/wiki/Alejandro_Almeida There are aspects of this characters' bio that seem to be the same as the story of the fictional character. I also could not find him on the Florida govt website. 208.185.237.210 (talk) 14:30, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely fails notability standards then, obviously WP:NPOL doesn't count for fictional people. GPL93 (talk) 14:33, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The mere fact that there is a fictional character based on (or named after) this person does not mean that we can ignore WP:NPOL or the General Notability Guideline. Again, PLEASE familiarize yourself with the applicable policies and review the sources carefully (including a THOROUGH WP:BEFORE search prior to voting on or nominating articles for deletion. The nominator has a history of inaccurate and failed WP:AFD noms including Bennye Gatteys as well as Wilfred Roy Cousins and each failed as a result of similarly dubious arguments which contradicted policy. 107.77.204.106 (talk) 14:37, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There's a huge difference between those previous AfD's in that there was actual sourcing to back up notability claims. I'm sorry, but at the end of the day Competency is required to edit Wikipedia. You can't see the issue with the fact that there isn't any evidence that Almeida was actually ever a member of Congress or held any elected office for that matter. GPL93 (talk) 14:43, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GPL93 I’m embarrassed by the way I handled those 2 older AFDs but I think I have improved with time. I don’t see it as a competency issue still. I noted in my nomination paragraph that this article appears to be a combination of the video game character and another real life political named Bill Gunter, including using Gunter’s name instead of Almeida’s In some places. I see that this has been removed but you can see where someone tried to patch it here:

• https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/921390395

I am assuming good faith that this article is not a hoax, but I can find no evidence anywhere that this person exists. Michepman (talk) 15:02, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Michepman: No need to be embarrassed by those, I've been there as well and its usually much more clear after the AfD than when you first nominated it. The reason why I invoked CIR is because the editor has tried to pass off an amalgamation of sources (none of which are reliable) about at least three different people (none of whom are actually the Alejandro Almeida in question) and despite my attempts to reasonably prove the editors claims he instead is insisting that the other recent delete voter and myself are the ones who don't understand Wikipedia policy. The editor is not making any attempt to acknowledge there's no actual sourcing, just saying its "not the best", and insisting that I am somehow ignoring NPOL on a a person who definitely never served in office and may not even actually exist. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:11, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This article started out as a poorly executed hoax and does not seem to have gotten better with time. Rockphed (talk) 16:57, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

As a reminder that the civility policy applies even to WP:AFD discussions. This article has been around since 2012 and has been extensively worked on by a number of long-term editors including Ser Amantio di Nicolao, Qzd, Alexander Tendler among many others. Writing off all of this work as a hoax is needlessly incivil and inflammatory. 107.77.204.109 (talk) 17:28, 17 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Never been a member of the US House, for one thing, which makes me suspect a hoax. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:32, 17 October 2019 (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.