Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos Soto Arriví

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 redirect to Cerro Maravilla murders. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:34, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos Soto Arriví

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

My previous attempt to redirect was reverted by Mercy11 (talk · contribs) who cited WP:CONSENSUS, even though there is no consensus on any talk page (as far as I can see) and they are clearly ignorant of WP:BOLD. Anyway, I see no evidence of any independent notability away from the Cerro Maravilla murders article, so I propose we redirect/merge as appropriate. I am also nominating:

Arnaldo Darío Rosado (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

for the exact same reason. These individuals are not notable; their deaths are, and an appropriate article already exists. 13:31, 25 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by GiantSnowman (talk • contribs)

Comment. Being bold means do it with civility and calling some one ignorant fails that mark. As a long time editor, Snowman should stop playing dumb and know that nowhere in WP:BOLD it says consensus must have been reached in the past, as is his assumption here. If the nominator wants to delete the article, it needs to be done the way Wikipedia has determined it be done: following procedure - via the appropriate channels, as he is now finally doing it. My name is Mercy11 (talk) 13:56, 25 July 2013 (UTC), and I approve this message[reply]

Sigh, I have not been uncivil, how is saying you are unaware of a guideline and pointing you in its direction a bad thing? You'll even note that WP:BOLD is linked to under WP:EDITCONSENSUS. Please read the guidelines you quote before creating more work for everybody involved. Giant Snowman 14:06, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 26 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per nom. Absolutely no reason for a standalone article. Beerest355 Talk 14:25, 28 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nom. If any editors are interested in merging content from either article, the histories will continue to be available for that purpose. --BDD (talk) 18:53, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Michaelzeng7 (talk) 22:37, 1 August 2013 (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.