Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Santiago B. Villafania

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:18, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Santiago B. Villafania

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

Article blatantly violates WP:SOAP, also does not satisfy WP:CREATIVE NoyPiOka (talk) 09:43, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 09:57, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He was called "Pangasinan's leading poet"[1] by Cirilo F. Bautista. Another source said "Pangasinan poetic tradition has seen rebirth in the verses of Mr. Santiago Villafania".[2] He has won an award[3] and nominated for the national book award[4]. Since this is a third world country we should be open to WP:SYSTEMIC and not try to hold too tight a reign of rules (they probably don't have the same tradition of book reviewing we expect to meet CREATIVE #3). Clearly a leading figure in the arts within the context of Pangasinan "poetic tradition". -- Green Cardamom (talk) 15:26, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please Keep. malagilion (talk) 07:05, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Green Cardamom's findings. Candleabracadabra (talk) 22:04, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The author and frequent contributor to the article is no other than the subject of the article himself. See his message on my talk page. This is a self-gratification page. We don't allow this on wikipedia. NoyPiOka (talk) 04:25, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nominator's rationale. The fact that this Malagilion guy responded on nominator's talk page AND voted Keep here indicates a conflict of interest. The traffic coming out of the anon that added much meat here is also heaping suspicion on them and Malagilion. There's a Tagalog slang term for this: pagbubuhat ng sariling bangko. It means lifting your own bench, but it is actually a subject talking about their own achievements. Unfortunately, such is the case here. The article itself has no proper BLP format. A rewrite could have been possible, but Malagilion's response on nom's talkpage simply indicates arrogance on his part. I have very little patience for such people and I've come across the likes of them before. Nuke this article from orbit. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:51, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I merely supplied the correct info. Asking the reason why is it being deleted is a mere question, Eaglestorm. How can that be arrogance? Since I was informed that it's for deletion. pagbubuhat ng sariling bangko? there's no need for me to do that ;) malagilion (talk) 08:29, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

for me to do that. See WP:YOURSELF, it says "Self-created articles are often listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. Beware that third-party comments may be most uncomplimentary." Unfortunately you can't stop such comments, but you can ignore them otherwise it could encourage more uncomplimentary comments. The wise choice is to not saying anything at all. And not create an WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 14:46, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. If I may add as well, supplying "correct info" about yourself still falls under COI and your response is nothing more than an act of desperation. You may possibly have some popularity in a number of literary circles Mr Villafania, but as a Wikipedian, you're wanting and you don't even know it. Thanks for the "denial" of your arrogant declarations, makes you more of a sarcastic fool than things may seem. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:15, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. now, who is arrogant here, Eaglestorm? i said i supplied the correct info, right? pls. read between the lines. i have no idea about COI. it's a pity you are hiding in a megalomaniac pseudonym. sayang, i have no option to know your real name. it would have been fun making your name famous. i am just awaiting deletion for the entry. so don't brag about your prowess. malagilion (talk) 02:12, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Wow, nice one with the deflection comeback and the highfaluting words right there. Sorry, but this discussion is not about me, its about you and your losing fight to save the article. Oh and do you think culling much of the info in the article works because you're awaiting its deletion? It just made things much worse, so thanks for shooting yourself in the foot by not even reading up on WP policies against self-promotion. The fact you're working on Anacbanua using "permission" from your friends is still COI... and Aguinaldo International School Manila? From the way things look, it seems you're connected to that school (an employee perhaps?), and that is another COI black mark on your record. You lament about "No option" to know my real name... boohoo, I see what game you're trying to play, so don't even try. This is my last response on the matter. If you do even reply to this, Sonny, well, baliw ka na talaga (you've really lost your mind). To the nominator, sorry to be on an NPA roll here, but this article is one of the worst examples of self-gratification I've ever seen in Wikipedia. It's actually better off in another wiki I know that pays lip service to NPOV. --Eaglestorm (talk) 05:51, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eaglestorm, I might gently point out that you admitted elsewhere on Wikipedia that you know Malagilion as an alum at your school, and I think technically that makes you also a WP:COI in this AfD. Not a serious problem but I think you should probably continue any disputes with Malagilion outside Wikipedia and the closing admin should be aware. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 06:40, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I have no disputes with the subject but the fact he's trying to fight off AFD is just stupid. Yes, he's known at my alma mater, but your claims of me having COI in this AFD is rather baseless. Don't play into his hands. --Eaglestorm (talk) 07:31, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 18:54, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per Green Cardamom mostly. Even a blatant COI isn't really relevant to notability. A few editors probably need to be told to refrain from editing the article and the article itself needs work (whichever version you use as a base), but those are WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM problems. At the end of the day, GC's analysis is convincing. It's perhaps "niche" notability, but that's enough for me. Stalwart111 23:58, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, but needs major cleanup - The article has serious COI issues, which should be addressed as soon as possible, but nevertheless the sources presented earlier in this discussion suggest that the subject is of note. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 06:04, 21 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Green Cardamom. The COI conflict is not relevant to the notability discussion. However, all editors with COI regarding this topic should refrain from further edits to the article. Factchecker25 (talk) 14:12, 22 September 2013 (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.