Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mario Arturo Moreno Ivanova

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 to delete. W.marsh 15:46, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mario Arturo Moreno Ivanova

• del perfectly nonnotable son of a Brazilian celebrity. Wikipedia is not a tabloid. mikka (t) 01:08, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, non-notable. Royboycrashfan 01:10, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable son of Mexican celebrity. The father, Cantinflas, was pretty notable. The son isn't. Fan1967 01:13, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:18, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Catinflas. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 01:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Entirely nn. Says he's got 2 kids and a drug problem. Whoopedee doo. Deizio 02:41, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, after merging anything useful to Cantinflas Jude(talk,contribs) 03:20, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable. You're all looking at it from the wrong perspective. If this was an American with the same level of notability, it'd be an easy keep. Everyking 03:47, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with Cantinflas. He's Cantinflas' son, after all. If John Wayne's kids made the news, they'd probably be on John Wayne's page. However, until he does something more notable than show up once in a while on Escandalo TV, doesn't deserve his own page. Same standard, I think, as would apply to American celebrity kids. Tubezone 05:05, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with Cantinflas per Tubezone. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 06:05, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Comment I created the article to activate red links in the Cantinflas article as part of the ongoing effort to raise to FA status. I don't think Moreno Ivanova's drug problem or corruption are particularly notable, but I do think Everyking has a point. That said, I think merging this "daughter" into its "parent" would unnecessarily lengthen the article. However, the result of this vote will help to determine what else not to link, because if his son isn't notable, then his nephew (and the other links that are of equal note) sure isn't.--Rockero 08:03, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Often the solution to redlinks is to remove the link, rather than create the article. Many people are indiscriminate with linking far more than is needed. Fan1967 14:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I agree, nn -- Samir ∙ T C 08:29, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Canadians voting on Cantinflas or his (adopted) spawn is about as valid as Mexicans voting on deleting Rachel Marsden (hija de la gran..) . Or maybe there's a Univision Canadiense running holiday Cantinflas film festivals (or a CBC Mexicano... now there's an interesting idea.. howzabout El Nuevo Show Rojo Verde or Esta hora contiene 20 minutos )? The point of the article as noted above was to eliminate red links. Some reference to MAMI has to be made in any comprehensive biography of Cantinflas. There's like, a kajillion Canadian-born Hollywood celebrities (there's an idea for a list! It'd be very long!) I bet a bunch have subsidiary links like Mario Arturo Moreno Ivanova... Tubezone 09:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
    • An unnecessary comment. Don't make fun of my country. He's a non-notable son of a notable celebrity, as judged by what's in the article. There wouldn't be an article on Rojo Verde's nn adopted son. It's independent of nationality. And there is reference to MAMI in the Cantinflas article. -- Samir ∙ T C 10:36, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
    • To me, reading the article, it seems like the guy is the subject of at least occasional media attention, that he is a public figure in some sense (a minor celebrity, perhaps), and there's stuff published that deals with him in a substantial way (namely a tell-all autobiography by his ex-wife—apparently he's significant enough that scandalous information of that sort matters to some people). That doesn't make him highly notable, but I think it makes him notable enough. Everyking 10:05, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as nn. --Terence Ong 12:39, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Leave a redirect to Cantinflas, where this guy is already mentioned. This is not a difficult decision to make. Proto||type 14:24, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge as per tubezone's comments Localzuk ^(talk) 15:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Merge any useful content to Cantinflas as per tubezone. --BillC 22:18, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable. --Ghirla ^-трёп- 07:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Not only is he the son of one of Mexico's cinematic pioneers, but the story of his adoption is interesting, and his scandals make headlines in Mexico, where they have even warranted a book. As a living person, he could still do something that would bring him either notoriety or more fame. Merging would unnecessarily lengthen his father's article--Rockero 17:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
• Strong keep. The article itself is not complete. It does not mention the 11-year legal battle he fought with Columbia Pictures regarding ownership of Cantinflas' films, as well as family problems relating to Cantinflas' estate. He's made headlines in Mexico and as Rockero mentioned, he is the son of one of Mexico's greatest comedians and has much more notability than say, Pele's son, Edinho. Gflores ^Talk 17:31, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
  • You must be kidding. mikka (t) 01:46, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

• Strong keep I cannot understand these deletion votes, perhaps there is a lack of cultural understanding here? Strong Strong Keep. Joaquin Murietta 04:15, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Most celebrities have children and grandchildren and bastards. A person is notable by what he is done by himself. Fighting to grab father's money is hardly a notable feat. mikka (t) 01:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• weak keep seems as if he might be vaguely notable in his own country Jcuk 21:42, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Very weak keep - sounds like something out of a telenovela, but looks like he has achieved notability or notoriety in Brazil. ProhibitOnions 22:32, 14 March 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.