Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Panama

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Panama. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject 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 at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP: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:

and 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 the edit summary as 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|Panama|~~~~}} 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 few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Panama. 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's deletion policy and WP:AfD for 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 to Americas.

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

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Panama/archive

Purge page cache

watch

Panama

José Antonio Sossa

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

Insufficient coverage, limited to talking about BLP court cases. I compile part of the conditions of a BLP "Biographies of living persons should be written conservatively and respecting the neutrality of the subject. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: its function is not to be sensationalist nor to be the main vehicle for the dissemination of judicial statements. Iban14mxl (talk) 19:47, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 April 13. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:53, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Panama-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:59, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:59, 13 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:21, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NPOL. Seems like he held a national high position (attorney general). But I think the article needs to be clean up significantly but AFD is not clean up Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 01:43, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

apart from the fact that it is unknown when he was born Iban14mxl (talk) 02:34, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a reason to delete the page. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 12:36, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete After reviewing all the sources, it's clear they do not support notability under either WP:GNG. The WP:SIGCOV of the subject is in unreliable sources 190.33.41.159 (talk) 00:10, 20 April 2025 (UTC)— 190.33.41.159 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 03:42, 21 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Omar Albertto

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

Fails GNG. I can't find any coverage except for 1988 article in LA Times. Article is completely promotional and was created by banned user. —Kaliforniyka^Hi! 20:15, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. —Kaliforniyka^Hi! 20:15, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Panama. Shellwood (talk) 20:43, 23 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. While most of the sources (both in the article and in a quick google search) are pretty low quality, I've found a couple that I think are usable for notability purposes. Mr Feel Good Academy of Fashion Arts and Sciences Ageist, and LA Style. He was also quoted in a 1994 issue of Cosmopolitan[1] but I am not sure if that article provided substantial coverage. His heyday as an agent appears to have been in pre- and early internet days so more sources may be available offline. Article should be trimmed and rewritten to avoid promotion and unsourced detail but I think there is some substance behind the glitz. Eluchil404 (talk) 23:01, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Five sources suggested. If the subject is notable, WP:THREE would be enough.
1. A good feature on Omar, but it is Omar talking about himself. Not independent.

2. His promotional biography. Not independent.

3. Up close and personal feature of Omar, sourced from Omar. Not independent.

4. Broken. The Url says it is an interview. Interviews are not independent, but are promotion tools.

5. A snippet quote by the subject. Not significant. Not independent.

”usable for notability purposes”? These are not WP:GNG-qualifying sources. Neither do they verifiable measures in WP:BIO or WP:CORP. They are only usable if the use is for obfuscation. SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:22, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:29, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I'm not knowledgeable about fashion, but a quick online search shows a few different profiles that indicate notability as Eluchil404 listed. Article does need a significant rewrite to meet quality standards though.

Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 00:03, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Not really encylopedic. Article here since 2016. With such poor sourcing after this time, it means not even editors seem to care about the subject. Ramos1990 (talk) 00:31, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: See WP:SURMOUNTABLE and WP:NOEFFORT in particular - deletion is a question of subject notability, not article quality. Anerdw (talk) 15:39, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I cannot find any source that can be suitable for this article, just promotional content and profiles 201.225.3.154 (talk) 03:35, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 00:18, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Insufficient coverage. Iban14mxl (talk) 21:48, 14 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete In its current form, the article is a borderline WP:G11. Taking on board the sources, I don't think there's enough to blow up and start over. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:43, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 14:56, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article reads as if it was made by an AI. Very biased and poorly sourced

Thegoofhere (talk) 15:00, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lol, the article literally misspells Alberto's name Thegoofhere (talk) 20:14, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No it doesn't. The sources I list in my comment above show that the, unusual, spelling Albertto is correct. Even if you find the sources insufficient to support notability, you should read them before opining on an article. Eluchil404 (talk) 21:48, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw the IMDB page and assumed that's how his name was spelt. Sorry. Thegoofhere (talk) 22:58, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There is coverage in digitised newspapers from 1987-1994. As Eluchil404 noted, there is also coverage in magazines like Cosmopolitan, and one of the newspaper articles I found says he and Omar's Men were on the cover of French-language City magazine. These magazines are not online, so we'd need to find hard copies to use them as sources. The current article definitely needs trimming and better referencing - it can be improved using the sources we've found and making better use of the existing sources. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:14, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:PROMO, part of a network of questionable articles 190.219.103.199 (talk) 22:49, 22 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Reads as a CV, throughout. Checking the references, the first five thoroughly, they are not independent secondary sources. Mostly, not even remotely. The third is close, but when reading the detail of coverage, it is sourced to the subject with explicit quoting, which makes the source non independent. SmokeyJoe (talk) 02:13, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]