Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clemente G. Gomez-Rodriguez (3rd 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 keep (non-admin closure). As with the previous two nominations, no delete preferences were expressed, and editors are reminded that WP:PROBLEMS are not grounds for deletion. Skomorokh 01:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Clemente G. Gomez-Rodriguez

Clemente G. Gomez-Rodriguez (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Not notable as an author, as his self-published book fails WP:BK. Insufficient WP:RS presented to establish any other notability. Thousands of Cubans have been jailed by Castro and thousands have come to the United States. Obviously, we're not going to have articles about each of them. There's an assertion that he was a lawyer in Cuba, but no evidence is given that he was a notable one. Qworty (talk) 03:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• VERY STRONG KEEP. I am amazed that this article is even up for a vote.. In the second nominiation there was not one vote in favor a deletion. He was a very notable defence attorney in Cuba, additionally he has appeared on numerious national Spanish language shows discussing both his self-published book and the Ochoa Trial Case no 1-1989 in Cuba. Callelinea (talk) 03:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  • The amount and depth of coverage from reliable sources is unclear, which is a problem that hasn't changed since the last AfD. Inline citations would be helpful so we can see how much of the article's content comes from his book, how much is attributable to third-party sources, and how much is just from your own personal knowledge. Adding more words to the article without making it clear the source of the newly added information isn't especially useful in cases like this. cab (talk) 05:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

• Comment the Nuevo Herald article contains only a brief mention of him, and just about the only reference I can find to his book is [1]. Being on TV does not necessarily contribute to notability --- it strongly depends on the nature of the appearances, so we need more detail on these. If he's the subject of a documentary, then yes, that counts as non-trivial coverage as required by WP:N. Being quoted on the evening news or showing up as a panelist on a talk show, not really. cab (talk) 04:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  • I note that User:Callelinea has added four more works under the "references" section of the article, but three of them, Cuban Anarchism: The History of a Movement, Producing Legality: Law and Socialism in Cuba, and Cuba: From Columbus to Castro and Beyond do not have any hits on the given name "Clemente" and they do not list Mr. Gomez-Rodriguez in their indexes. Again, it would help if User:Callelinea could clarify the depth of coverage on TV and in Cuba: Anuario Histórico 1990, and add inline citations to make it clear what exactly these works are doing in the reference section given that they don't seem to mention the article's subject. cab (talk) 02:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
    • I hope now the way I have written the references will assist you better. Sorry for the confussion.Callelinea (talk) 03:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
      • No worries, thanks. cab (talk) 03:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Rewrite with reliable sources. Otherwise it will be struck down. BoL (Talk) 04:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
• Keep. Two verified second-party sources is all you need for a keep here, and that is what we have. MrPrada (talk) 06:31, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Not quite, the exact language in WP:N is "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be notable", and "The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage and quality of the sources. Multiple sources are generally preferred." Out of four sources listed in the article now, one is self-published, one is trivial (a mention of him in the context of the team of defence lawyers of which he was a part), and the depth of coverage in the remaining two is not clear (I asked the author to clarify that above). cab (talk) 06:47, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
    • The topic of the trial recieved extensive media coverage, in fact probably the only time a crimal court trial has gotten any allowed coverage by the Cuban government. Mr Gomez appeared on Cuban television many times during the trial. That trial was as watched in Cuba as the OJ Simpson trial was watched in the United States, not by as many persons but by probably the highest % of the Cuba population. Callelinea (talk) 03:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Keep Though of course I'd prefer print sources, being on TV for an hour-long interview is definitely in-depth coverage. cab (talk) 03:49, 3 April 2008 (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.