Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luis Rodriguez Varela

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 of the debate was no consensus. --Sam Blanning^(talk) 12:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Luis Rodriguez Varela

stub, not wikified, not citing sources, cleanup tag since June 2005, not linked by any Wikipedia article Deleteme42 21:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep and Expand This person seems to be of historical interest (see our Dear and Glorious Leader, Google), but the article needs more info. --0zymandias 21:51, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

• cleanup tag since June 2005: I doubt the article will expand itself - are you doing it? Deleteme42 21:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep and expand. Notable historical figure, and the fact that it hasn't been expanded yet doesn't mean that it never will be. We're a work in progress, yo, and eventually someone who knows their history of the Philippines will take care of it. Until then, it's not hurting anything. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 16:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

• See my comment in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Snowdon (second nomination). Unfortunately, it seems in this case even an AfD isn't enough motivation for anyone to improve the article. Deleteme42 16:24, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
• You appear to be confused. AFD isn't for expansion or improvement; it's for deletion. WP:CU is thataway, and if you aren't content to wait, you can always feel free to improve them yourself. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 17:22, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

• 1.40% of all Wikipedia articles are listed for cleanup Category:Cleanup_by_month plus even more with other tags like e.g. wikify. There are 16,037 articles listed at Category:Cleanup_by_month (with at about 100 new articles each day) - I doubt adding them to WP:CU would help. This article has a cleanup tag since one year, is not linked by any Wikipedia article and does not cite it's sources. If someone will now or at any time in the future create a proper article about him that's perfectly fine with me. But as we've discussed on my talk page, it seems we won't agree on such issues... Deleteme42 19:27, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep — Notable, even in brief form. RJH (talk) 19:31, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete There's no context and the notability claim seems fairly weak to me. The first four Google hits are for Wikipedia or mirror sites. Kerowyn 22:31, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
• I've gone ahead and expanded it a bit, though this really isn't my forte. There look to be a lot of good Spanish-language sources on the guy, including some books he published in the late 17th and early 18th centuries, if anybody who knows Spanish feels like having a go. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 01:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

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.