Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Calixto

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 delete. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:00, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mark Calixto

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Not finding evidence that the subject will pass WP:GNG or WP:NPOL ASUKITE 13:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, Politics, and Philippines. ASUKITE 13:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a promotional piece for a clearly non notable individual. Mccapra (talk) 14:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:GNG as a non-notable local politician whose only possible claim to notability is that he is the son of the former mayor of a large city, and notability is WP:NOTINHERITED. Page is also highly promotional, though CSD:G11 does not apply as there is some biographical information as well. Frank Anchor 14:43, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. City councillors are not "inherently" notable just for holding office; to qualify for a Wikipedia article, a city councillor has to demonstrate and source a credible reason why he should be seen as a special case of significantly greater notability than most other city councillors. But this is written like a résumé, not like a proper encyclopedia article, and is referenced entirely to the city's own self-published website about itself rather than any evidence of notability-building coverage in third-party sources. And notability is WP:NOTINHERITED, so the fact that his father happens to be a member of the national legislature does not make him more special than other city councillors either. Bearcat (talk) 17:40, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Who knows, they may become notable someday; they are not, today. BD2412 T 22:55, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NPOL. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 04:39, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:19, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. Also WP:NOTINHERITED.--Lenticel ^(talk) 11:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Bearcat's reasoning. Best, GPL93 (talk) 22:33, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per WP:SNOW. ––FormalDude (talk) 07:27, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per above, fails WP:NPOL with WP:NOTINHERITED. Considered as WP:SNOW due to all voted !delete. CruzRamiss2002 (talk) 13:03, 21 October 2022 (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.