Jump to content

Talk:Rafael de Miguel González

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Acceptance at AFC

[edit]

In my view this was borderline to accept. Rather than allowing it to languish I chose to accept it and allow the community to reach a conclusion. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 07:43, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Borderline? Really? See my comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation#Draft:Rafael_de_Miguel_González_declined_5_times. – Joe (talk) 08:06, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments left by AfC reviewers

[edit]
  • Comment: We have a problem here. The subject is likely a notable academic, and this could, technically, be accepted and allowed to take its chance in mainspace. Our role is to accept drafts which we think have a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. As written and referenced I view its chances as close to 50% for survival, but below that
    Why?
    Because you have not given a single reference that shows the following:
    For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
    I'm willing to accept the draft on the basis of likely notability, but please, just one really good reference and it will make reviewing it a lot easier. Talk to me on my talk page if it will help you. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 07:17, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: It doesn't seem like you've changed anything since the last review. Please take the reviews as a way to improve the article before it gets looked at again. LR.127 (talk) 05:58, 5 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent changes

[edit]

Recent edits by User:Humboldt2020 have turned this from a barely acceptable article to what looks like blatant personal promotion; see WP:AUTOBIO and WP:NOTRESUME. See here for LR.127's initial concern. We cannot be asked to be constantly policing this page; if the problems persist, I would be in favor of having this article deleted. @Asilvering, LR.127, Timtrent, Joe Roe, and Benison: as they have previous involvement.  Mr.choppers | ✎  17:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr.choppers, I don't see any attempt to discuss this with @Humboldt2020 here or on their talk page, so I'm not going to take any action at present. Humboldt2020: please consider this a formal warning that you are likely to be blocked from editing this page if you restore any further promotional material. If you have any questions about this, you're welcome to ask. You have already been notified about editing with a WP:COI and I do not see any disclosures about this on your userpage; please clearly disclose your COI before making any further edits here. -- asilvering (talk) 18:41, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this was meant as such which is why I linked them - sorry, should have expressed it directly. Best,  Mr.choppers | ✎  19:11, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked them from editing the article directly. @Humboldt2020: Please respond to concerns here and, if you have a conflict of interest regarding this subject, disclose it and make edit requests. – Joe (talk) 13:02, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]