Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Santos

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 as per unanimous consensus and no calls for deletion beyond the nominator. A non-admin closure. And Adoil Descended (talk) 12:10, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Santos

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

WP:NOTMEMORIAL, WP:SOAPBOX fails GNG, WP:N (people) ^{Atsme📞📧} 01:07, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The Seattle Times headlined their obit "legendary civil rights leader dies". Plenty of coverage. FloridaArmy (talk) 01:54, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:13, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 04:13, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 18:45, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He gets coverage in reliable sources already in the article and looking around I found another one. [1] I agree with FloridaAmy, if a major newspaper says "legendary civil rights leader dies" then he must be a notable person. Dream Focus 18:52, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

comment - the cited sources are obituaries, not actual articles in RS independent of the subject. Friends and family can submit obit articles all over the place. WP is not a memorial, and WP:N requires multiple RS independent of the subject that verify notability. Being a community advocate fails GNG. ^{Atsme📞📧} 19:00, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -- Ms. Atsme, you are confused here. The Seattle Times obit is an editorial obit, not a family-submitted obit. It's written by a staff writer and it's a perfectly reasonable way to establish notability. We find the same kind of editorial obit in NBC news, The Seattle Weekly, and so on. And the guy was notable even before he died, see e.g. KUOW story on activism from 1970s. In short, meets and exceeds WP:GNG. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 19:12, 13 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

comment - nope, his activities were local; an activist in his old neighborhood. Sorry, but notability requires multiple RS that verify widespread recognition. The cited sources are local obits, one is in a Slog (whatever that is), 2 more are obits in local news sources, and there's a bio of him in a free online encyclopedia funded by the State of Washington, which comes closer than the local obits but it doesn't satisfy N. ^{Atsme📞📧} 03:46, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reply -- Ah, come now, Ms. Atsme, it's silly to call coverage from Seattle "local." Seattle has 3.7 million people in the metro area. That's more than many sovereign nations. It's more people than Uruguay. You can't dismiss actual RS from Seattle as "local" unless you're prepared to delete every article on everyone from Uruguay who didn't get covered in non-Uruguayan newspapers. That's clear WP:BIAS. Maybe someone who's only covered in the East Jesus Gazette could be said to have only local coverage, but in this case it's silly. 192.160.216.52 (talk) 13:18, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For comparison, that is roughly 8% of the population of Canada (just slightly less than all of Alberta or British Columbia) --TheSandDoctor (talk) 22:08, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for proving my point. ^{Atsme📞📧} 22:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Has significant, in-depth coverage in reliable, secondary sources. In addition to those sources already in the article, the subject is mentioned in a number of books that pop up on Google Books. Neutrality^talk 20:12, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please cite those books so we can get beyond obits? I will withdraw my AfD if RS (not obits) can be cited or at least show they exist beyond his neighborhood advocacy. Thanks in advance. ^{Atsme📞📧} 22:32, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Go to Google Books, type in "Bob Santos" + "Seattle" and you will see. Neutrality^talk 00:42, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I did, and one book came up, Gang of Four (Seattle), a Seattle publisher. There are other Bob Santos that pull up in the search, but not him. Perhaps a redirect or merge to that one book would be better than deleting. Unless a person has received widespread (national/international) coverage during their lifetime (not only in death cited only to obits), we typically merge or redirect. I'm not aware of any biography that passed notability requirements based only on obituaries but if that's what consensus supports, it will be a first. ^{Atsme📞📧} 05:10, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per all of the above. --TheSandDoctor (talk) 22:03, 15 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- has sufficient coverage, for example, in Africana Race and Communication, with a section dedicated to his life and career as a civil rights advocate. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:27, 19 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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.