Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jorge Vargas González (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 delete. Sandstein 17:55, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jorge Vargas González

Jorge Vargas González (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)

I can't understand why this page was kept at a previous AFD. The subject's main claim to fame is being mayor of a 13,000 person town. The nav box shows an serious effort to build out content around everyone that has been a mayor of this little village. There is even Mayors of Pichilemu which seems to have been deleted and recreated. Legacypac (talk) 01:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:47, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Chile-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:48, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. A town of 13,000 population is not a "little village". Someone may fail WP:NPOL but pass WP:GNG, which seems to be the case here. Review the article's references and consider whether the person passes WP:GNG. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 04:53, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen building complexes in China with morr people. Legacypac (talk) 05:14, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Quibbling over whether a population of 13,000 makes a place a "little village" or not is entirely orthogonal to the point, which is that a population of 13,000 is not enough to hand all of the place's mayors an automatic inclusion freebie just for existing as mayors. Yes, maybe a mayor of a place this size could manage to pass WP:NPOL #2 on depth of press coverage, but it's far from clear that that's true here: this is entirely too dependent on primary sources (birth and marriage certificates from the civil registry office) and routine election coverage and glancing namechecks of his existence in coverage that isn't about him — and while there are a few sources that are actually reliable and independent and strongly enough about him to count for something, there aren't enough of those once you discount all the weaksauce stuff. Every mayor of everywhere can always show three or four or five media hits, so the way to make a smaller town's mayor notable is not just to show three or four or five media hits — it's to show a depth and range and volume of coverage that marks him out as a special case of significantly greater notability than most other mayors of places this size. But the volume of reliable and substantive coverage in genuinely GNG-worthy sources shown here is not accomplishing that: it's just matching "what every mayor can always show", not lifting him into the realm of the special. Bearcat (talk) 13:14, 8 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete local politicians get local coverage. We need more to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:00, 10 April 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.