Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/René Henry Gracida

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:01, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] René Henry Gracida

René Henry Gracida (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Being a bishop is not inherently notable. If he had done something notable on his own, then I could see keeping this. Corvus cornix 23:11, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Strong Keep.. I wrote the article and believe that Bishops are notable since the area they "rule" are larger and more populous then some states. This particular Bishop has plenty of references in various national papers due to his right-wing conservative views. Callelinea 03:50, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete without prejudice. Wikipedia is not catholic-hierarchy.org or LexisNexis. There are sources quoted without explaining what those sources say. There could be a good article on this subject but the one there isn't it. Stifle (talk) 10:00, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

To have a good article is fine, but in this case the articles mentioned in the reference section ( Washington Post, The Miami Herald, Houston Cronicle, Dallas Morning News, etc.)is to show that this individual is notable, which is the reason why this article was nominated. This person is Very notable.Callelinea 14:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The references don't reflect anything in the article. If there is notability in the newspaper articles, it isn't being shown in the encylcopedia article. Corvus cornix 16:35, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Your reason for geting rid of this article is what? That Roman Catholic Bishops are not notable or that this particular bishop is not notable? This is a great source of references and is where I got many of my references on this bishop.. http://nl.newsbank.com/ I wrote this article as a stub of an article to get the bare bone facts in, not to be a perfect well written article. I provided the references for those who believe that this particular bishop is notable, even though my opinion is that all Roman Catholic Bishops are notable.Callelinea 20:24, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Keep We have always consistently kept the bishops of those churches organized around geographic lines. there is always coverage in local news sources as important community figures. and in fact this article does havw such sources--and not just local,but national. I'd support keeping corresponding figures of other denominations, but it's not quite as easy to tell as when there is an established hierarchy. DGG (talk) 17:38, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• QUESTION..I was wondering if there is someway to join the three Afd nominations together : John Joseph Nevins , René Henry Gracida , and Felipe de Jesus Estevez together, since the question before us as presented by the nominator is not really if these bishops are notable but are Roman Catholic Bishops notable just for being bishops.Callelinea 20:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep-RFD 20:54, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Keep a Roman Catholic bishop is in charge of the churches, priests, and parishes in his diocese. If the diocese rates an article, so should the Bishop.--Mike Searson 21:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Being a bishop is inherently notable Nick mallory 23:08, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Keep Bishops are, by definition, notable --- if they are in a church that is in communion with the Holy See jonathon 00:48, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, per DGG. Accurizer 00:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, and as I said on another disputed bishop article], "there are currently only 2946 Roman Catholic bishops according to this source. Being a bishop is, furthermore, NOTABLE, and if the bishop is of a major diocese, is an extremely public figure, akin to a mayor or even a senator." Alekjds ^talk 01:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Bishops are notable in Wikipedia Catholicism. NancyHeise 01:54, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - a search of Google News Archives finds 187 news articles on bishop gracida corpus christi, including articles from The New York Times, The Washington Post, and The Dallas Morning News. Gentgeen 02:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
• Strong keep. The nominator was sidetracked into looking for an automatic notability provision for bishops, but this well-referenced article clearly meets the WP:BIO test of multiple non-trivial coverage in independent sources. I invite the nominator to review WP:BIO and withdraw the nomination, or for an admin to speedy close this AfD per WP:SNOW. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:BIO. - Kittybrewster ☎ 13:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per WP:BIO - Galloglass 13:56, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep Above and beyond the fact that Bishops of the Roman Catholic Church are inherently notable, the ample reliable and verifiable sources satisfy the Wikipedia:Notability standard. Alansohn 19:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Perhaps we need a written guideline on this. Even an auxiliary archbishop for a large arch diocese in an Orthodox church or the Roman Catholic church should be inherently notable. Being named bishop should be considered an achievement at least as significant as playing on a pro sports team or being released on a major record label (to compare apples and oranges). Monsignors and priests , unless they've done something else notable, no. A bishop in a sect with a lower membership, probably not. (I didn't say that as clearly as I would have liked.) Someone self anointed or with a small, obscure congregation, not unless otherwise notable. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 20:29, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping the discussion open on these three bishops, even though all three will probably be kept. I also feel that there should be a written guideline on this also. There is no need for Roman Catholic Bishops being brought up over and over again for AfDs, when the end result will be the same. It would save alot of time and effort if a guideline was in place. Callelinea 20:39, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy keep. I'm sure that a better approach could have been taken to come to this conclusion. Burntsauce 18:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
• Note: WikiProject Catholicism has been informed of this ongoing discussion. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 01:05, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. A diocesan (non-auxiliary) bishop should be presumed notable by office. However, in many cases the bio could be merged into the article on the diocese. Probably not in this case though, because he's been a bishop of two dioceses and subject to considerable news reports. Gimmetrow 03:27, 30 October 2007 (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.