Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Venezuela

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related toVenezuela.It is one of manydeletion listscoordinated byWikiProject Deletion sorting.Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page atWP:AFD.Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page atWP:AFD.If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this pageand add{{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}}to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in theedit summaryas it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding{{subst:delsort|Venezuela|~~~~}}to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a fewscripts and toolsthat can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed bya bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod,CfD,TfDetc.) related to Venezuela. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except{{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}}is used for MFD and{{transclude xfd}}for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with{{prodded}}will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia'sdeletion policyandWP:AfDfor general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related toSouth America.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Venezuela/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also:Wikipedia:Venezuela-related regional notice board

Venezuela

Venezuela Solidarity Campaign

(Find sources:Google(books·news·scholar·free images·WP refs)·FENS·JSTOR·TWL)

WP:SIRSrequires that sources establishing notability need to be "completely independent of the article subject" and reliable. I could only find pro-Venezuelan-government sources about this organization. I find it dubious whether these sources establish notability, therefore I am nominating this for deletion.Janhrach(talk)16:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in thedeletion sortinglists for the following topics:Organizations,Politics,United Kingdom,andVenezuela.Janhrach(talk)16:26, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
KeepThere does seem to besome decent coveragein books. I'll have a more thorough look later. I'm unsure how and on what basis you can characterise particular media sources as "pro-Venezuelan-government". What media sources which are "anti-Venezuelan-government" and are they acceptable to establish notability?AusLondonder(talk)16:51, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As for the Google Books results, it seems most are either citations of VSC, or trivial mentions. That was my first glance on the search results, but I do not deny there may be books that provide substantial coverage.

By "pro-Venezuelan-government", I meant, for example,Venezuelanalysisand the Liberation News ofParty for Socialism and Liberationor other party-affiliated sites. I do not mean that all "pro-Venezuelan-government" do not establish notability – I expressed myself poorly. I doubt that specific sources establish notability because of their partisanness, with SIRS mandatingabsolute independence from the subject.I am no expert on notability, I could be mistaken.Janhrach(talk)17:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On the second glance, these mentioned sources do not seem to indicate notability for other, more sound reasons, so my remark about them is kind-of moot.Janhrach(talk)12:53, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keepthe breadth of trade union endorsements gives a good indication of the organisation's widespread support within the labour movement (including the largest UK unions). A small sample of reporting over time:Morning Star,Sydney Morning Herald(mention),Vice.WP:NEXIST.Regards, --Goldsztajn(talk)05:52, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Being significantly supported by the labor movement does not imply notablity; coverage is required. As for the sources you provided, respectively:
1. Some coverage, independence from the subject unclear,reliability unclear.
2. The source is not accessible for me because of a paywall.
3. Very little coverage on VSC.
—Janhrach(talk)13:23, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteLacks independent and reliable sources that establish its notability. Most sources referenced, such as Venezuelanalysis or Liberation News, are clearly partisan and closely tied to political ideologies that align with the subject, which undermines their neutrality. IMHO, organizations that engage in propaganda should be approached with circumspection, as their primary function is to distort reality to serve specific interests.Wilfredor(talk)09:00, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You may disagree politically with the group but describing them as engaging in propaganda is rather misleading. Irrespective of that, the motives of an organisation do not negate otherwise credible claims to notability. You have also failed to acknowledge the other sources, including books, providing coverage.AusLondonder(talk)12:17, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,Owen×☎12:13, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete– Unconvinced by the policy-based defences so far. If we put political opinions aside, this group has only trivial mentions in reliable sources, which does not satisfyWP:RS.There are many groups worldwide that support the Bolivarian Revolution and the current government of Venezuela. What makes this particular group notable? Perhaps a reliable source that significantly covers the group would be able to answer this question, but so far nobody has provided such a source.Yue 🌙21:33, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The sources have been provided multiple times, including newspapers and books.AusLondonder(talk)23:01, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where they have been provided?Janhrach(talk)10:54, 5 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see the sources that have been provided, but if the coverage in those sources were enough, then almost every political organisation in the world with more than a hundred supporters would have an article on Wikipedia. Where is the significant coverage by reliable sourcesestablishing notability?Where are the sources outside of unreliable ones that themselves are part of the campaign or reliable ones that mention the campaign beyond criticisms and to establish the background of subjects who are the actual focus of the articles?Yue🌙18:23, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,Doczilla_{Ohhhhhh, no!}22:07, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alejandro Otero Lárez

(Find sources:Google(books·news·scholar·free images·WP refs)·FENS·JSTOR·TWL)

BLP that failsWP:SIGCOV.No indication of significance. FailsWP:BIO.scope_creep^Talk15:30, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in thedeletion sortinglists for the following topics:Actors and filmmakersandVenezuela.Shellwood(talk)16:14, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in thedeletion sortinglists for the following topics:TelevisionandBeauty pageants.WCQuidditch☎✎19:15, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect toMister Venezuela 1999-My, oh my!(Mushy Yank)20:47, 19 September 2024 (UTC) (but he had some significant roles in notable telenovelas, so not opposed toKeepif other users suggest that outcome)-My, oh my!(Mushy Yank)19:01, 20 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Deleteper nom. I initially found this lacking per NBIO, as per the nominator, and draftified this so other interested parties could improve it, but an editor deemed that incorrect perWP:DONTDRAFTIFY.So just delete it. ☆Bri(talk)15:46, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
DeleteHowever, if good sources are not found for all the content (which is not that much, it should not cost much...) then there is a risk that other sources (databases) will copy us and false information will be distributed thanks to Wikipedia. --181.197.42.150(talk)15:31, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean? He is in every series cited (and much more) (I checked and for all I know, he might even meetWP:NACTORbtw). It seems your are raising a cleanup issue. -My, oh my!(Mushy Yank)17:01, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
On second thoughts, I favour a Keep: not only does he seem to meetWP:NACTOR,see SpWP please) but above all he meetsWP:ANYBIO,which states "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor". Lárez was Mister Venezuela 1999, which seems significant enough.-My, oh my!(Mushy Yank)17:48, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Its not, from long established consensus. Celebrity awards are generally non-notable, unless the internationally known like the oscars.scope_creep^Talk07:49, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the guideline says "The person has received awell-known and significant awardor honor "(which Mr Venezuela seems to be) and nothing about beinginternationally known(which Mr Venezuelais,being part of international pageants selections, btw) let alone aboutlike the oscars(why not the Nobel prizes to put the bar even higher?), and that "long-established consensus", although it might indeed exist, should not prevail over the current guideline in my opinion. Thank you all the same. NB-You might want to change the guideline and indicate that limitation if such a consensus really exists and is indeed accepted by a majority of users. I certainly would oppose such a change myself, so please ping me if you start such a discussion about it, thanks. (I do not think, anyway, that Mr Universe nor Mr Venezuela can be called "celebrity awards", not in a derogative way at least.) I'll therefore stand by my!vote, if I may. -My, oh my!(Mushy Yank)18:53, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know what the guideline says but you dont understand the different classes of awards and what they are actually worth, and what folk strive and crave for. Its not this. Its right down the list of significance and that is consensus. Indeed your!vote is your!vote, but this has all be discussed beforehand, years ago. If you haveWP:THREEsources, please post them up. Also its worth noting an award isn't generally sufficient on its own, unless its a really good award, likely a decent medal for example. If was a good award, its a good indication the person is notable. If was a good award and there was no coverage, I wouldn't have sent to Afd. I would have spent time trying to update it and add sources. Hope that helps.scope_creep^Talk21:14, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,Doczilla_{Ohhhhhh, no!}16:47, 27 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Iyou dont understand the different classes of awards and what they are actually worth.Thank you, sure, maybe. But a link explaining how "Mr Venezuela" is neither well-known nor significant and is not a "decent medal' and maybe, one showing thatthis has all be discussed beforehand, years agowould be nice. I am not sure I understand the rest of your reply. Also please note he is generally simply referred to asAlejandro OteroAgain, his roles in notable telenovelas could also be considered significant so that, on top of the award, a redirect, at least, should be discussed.-My, oh my!(Mushy Yank)18:23, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relistedto generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,Liz^Read!Talk!21:44, 4 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]