Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Venancio Antonio Morin

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. ✗plicit 02:08, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Venancio Antonio Morín

[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)

Hard to find sources. Being an undefined “military man and politician” could mean anything from corporal and small town city council member to four star*general and mayor of Caracas. No one has bothered to say. BostonMensa (talk) 01:29, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There are pages and pages of Spanish-language sources in Google Books for "Venancio A. Morin". Agree the article could do with attention. Espresso Addict (talk) 01:49, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Military, and Venezuela. Shellwood (talk) 09:49, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Likely passes WP:GNG, as he has had significant coverage in this source and especially this biography. That is irrelevant, however, as he passes WP:NPOL based on the first source I linked, which states he served in the Venezuelan parliament from 1894 to 1897/8 ("After the elections for the constitutional term from 1894 to 1898, General Morín was elected Deputy to Congress for the state of Miranda"). Curbon7 (talk) 19:41, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Correction; the first source I linked appears to be partially a copy of the book. However, it does not copy the entire book, only portions, and it does appear to have some original content. Curbon7 (talk) 19:44, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Venezuela Tuya's page credits Eduardo Morín Brea as the source of the information, linking to an email address. Judging by the name, it could be a relative of the subject. --NoonIcarus (talk) 01:03, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep if the article sees at least a bit of improvement, delete (without prejudice against recreation if somebody's willing to put in more effort) if it doesn't. What's here now certainly isn't enough, and while it might be improvable it's far, far too common for articles that get kept on WP:NEXIST grounds to just never actually see the desired improvement at all, so that they just remain in an inadequate state and then get renominated a second time by some other user who's not familiar with the context of the first discussion. I'm also concerned, to some extent, by the fact that there isn't an article about him on the Spanish Wikipedia, where you would very much expect an article about a genuinely notable Venezuelan politician to be found — and, in fact, an article about him has previously been deleted there. To be fair, that appears to have been on copyvio grounds rather than fundamental non-notability grounds, but it still gives me pause that no Spanish-speaking editor has ever been arsed to try again. I obviously don't think we need to get this all the way to FA-status before I can be convinced to keep, but it does need to at least state something that would actually constitute a notability claim rather than just being "subject is a person who existed, the end" as it is right now. Bearcat (talk) 15:16, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Concur. Curbon7 (talk) 17:10, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I was hoping to offer some insight, although I thank Curbon7 for starting before. I found a biography in Venezuela Tuya (see entry in WP:VENRS). The biography describes that he reached the rank of general and participated in the Federal War and the Legalist Revolution, two of the main conflicts in Venezuela in the late 19st century, as well helping to quell uprisings. Likewise, it specifies that he served as regional deputy, councilman in Guárico state, civilian chief (which I assume is the period's equivalent of a mayor) and congressman, as well as being appointed as member of the Guzmán Blanco state [es] Supreme Court. All of these merits point at that the subject meets WP:POLITICIAN.

What I'm concerned about is how difficult I've had it to find other online sources, including in the Polar Foundation History Dictionary, whose content Venezuela Tuya usually copies, which is needed for WP:GNG. I would personally lean to keep the article and to be more lenient in this regard, considering that this is a historical figure, and focus on bibliographical material if possible. Manuel Landaeta Rosales [es] is one of the historians that seem to have written about him, already mentioned above. --NoonIcarus (talk) 01:01, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do we know it means minimal standards as politician? The article stares politician. That could be school board member or mayor of a town of 1500 people. If you know something more, I insist you add it to the the article with a verifiable reference. In like people who refused when I said that in the past and adamantly disagreed with me, a major point of Wiki is to collaboeate and share information, not keep it to yourself. BostonMensa (talk) 21:03, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keeping the information to myself is literally the opposite of what I did. I can offer the original quotes in Spanish and their respective English translations, but all of the information that I mentioned can be found in the source offered above, whose link in the article I have fixed. --NoonIcarus (talk) 03:56, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. NoonIcarus (talk) 01:05, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (but expand) as a historical figure and leading revolutionary. Clearly passes WP:NPOL. Taung Tan (talk) 18:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

comment Might I add that this article has been around for many years and no one has has expanded it beyond one very sad sentence. I agree on the surface, the subject has potential but based simply on what the article says, we are at best guessing. If no one has done anything in all these years, I Would be surprised I’d anyone did. I agree with the previous editor that said delete without prejudice or even sent to draft status and have an experienced editor sign off on it. BostonMensa (talk) 20:55, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And I want to add, the one reference doesn’t even work so what little there is to verify, I can’t. BostonMensa (talk) 20:57, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Draftification is actually not a bad idea. I can't work on it at the moment, but I can toss it into my promising drafts pile and get to it eventually. Curbon7 (talk) 22:40, 2 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think the national library would help find offline sources. Taung Tan (talk) 06:14, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Probably draftification is the right approach based on the state of the article. That said, the source found by Curbon7 is significant and shows that subject does pass WP:NPOL. --Enos733 (talk) 03:55, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I’m not sure what source you are talking about since when I look at the article, it is still the same dead end link that was there a few hours ago. It would be really nice if the editor took the five or so minutes to update the article with the new source so everyone could see it. BostonMensa (talk) 05:54, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the article needs expansion. Yes, the source found by Curbon7 is significant. I am not able to easily incorporate the source into the article because I do not have the time to translate from spanish. - Enos733 (talk) 02:18, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep if expanded, but Draftify if there is no additions to the article. The subject is notable, but this should be more than a one-line stub. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:24, 3 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NPOL and my comment above. The article has been expanded from its original version, pinging @BostonMensa, Shellwood, Curbon7, Bearcat, Taung Tan, Enos733, and GPL93: I'm still concerned about the overrealiance in a single source, but the merits should be enough for its inclusion. I imagine that the relative obscurity of the subject can be attributed due to its localized importance in the state. However, in a region where the capital cities are usually favored over the countryside, I think that it's even more important to strive for this type of representation. --NoonIcarus (talk) 03:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wow Amazing work. Thanks Taung Tan (talk) 04:27, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Any time! Please feel free to make any corrections, given that English is not my first language. --NoonIcarus (talk) 09:54, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Thank you. Very nice amd impressive improvement. Nice thing to see when I first wake up. BostonMensa (talk) 13:23, 4 November 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.