Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hugo Montoya

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 redirect to List of general authorities of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints#General Authority Seventies. Randykitty (talk) 17:17, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hugo Montoya

[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)

Non-notable subject that does not meet WP:BASIC. Coverage found in searches for independent, reliable sources is limited to passing mentions. The article is supported by primary sources, which do not serve to establish notability. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:19, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:19, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:19, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not enough sources independent of the LDS church. p b p 13:23, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep General authorities are of a level in the Church structure that they are presumed notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 23:26, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Good faith question from a newer editor: where is the consensus guideline that religious organization members are exempt from WP:GNG (or fall under alternative notability criteria similar to WP:NPOL or WP:PROF)? Bakazaka (talk) 01:37, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

General authorities are not presumed notable per any of Wikipedia's guidelines or policies. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:14, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – Furthermore, a previous discussion on the Notability (people) talk page in 2016, located here, regarding the notion of LDS church and other religious organization leaders being granted presumed notability on Wikipedia was widely opposed, with a consensus to not add a stipulation regarding said presumption of notability to the guideline page. Sorry, but the !vote above is rooted entirely in personal opinion, not Wikipedia guidelines or policies. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:30, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – There's no guideline page on English Wikipedia stating that any religious subjects are presumed notable. A section of the Common outcomes page, which is not a guideline or policy, but rather, an explanatory supplement, is located at WP:CLERGYOUTCOMES, which provides suggestions for some faiths, but not Mormonism. However, the Common outcomes page is not set in stone whatsoever, and simply exists to demonstrate some trends in Articles for deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:17, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this. The part that seems most important in WP:CLERGYOUTCOMES is that becoming a clergy member does not automatically confer notability, but people who become clergy members often become notable because their post puts them in a position to become notable, and they then do something that is notable outside the religious group. It makes sense that a Catholic bishop who then gets involved in community boards or local governance, for example, is likely to get coverage for it outside the church. But it is also clear that the notability guidelines could put some religious groups at a disadvantage in Wikipedia if their clergy are not put in a position to get coverage outside the church. To me that suggests being especially diligent about including clergy or other religious members who pass Wikipedia's notability guidelines, rather than altering Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion. Bakazaka (talk) 19:44, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Search does not find multiple independent reliable secondary sources to support notability for subject. Subject's position is undoubtedly important within the church context, but that has not translated into significant coverage that would satisfy WP:GNG. Bakazaka (talk) 19:44, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:39, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect Upon reflection, and in the interest of considering alternatives to deletion wherever possible, changing !vote to redirect this article to Seventy (LDS Church) makes sense. The subject's claim to notability is based on membership in that notable part of the church organization. The subject can't inherit notability from the organization, per WP:INHERITORG, and the subject otherwise fails WP:GNG or other possible notability requirements, but he could certainly be discussed in the Seventy (LDS Church) article if appropriate. Bakazaka (talk) 21:49, 11 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kirbanzo (talk) 02:17, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to List of general authorities of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints#General Authority Seventies where he is mentioned. Regards So Why 14:56, 25 August 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.