Talk:Rafael de Miguel González

Latest comment: 10 days ago by Joe Roe in topic Acceptance at AFC

Acceptance at AFC

edit

In my view this was borderline to accept. Rather than allowing it to languish I chose to accept it and allow the community to reach a conclusion. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 07:43, 5 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Borderline? Really? See my comment at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation#Draft:Rafael_de_Miguel_González_declined_5_times. – Joe (talk) 08:06, 5 August 2024 (UTC)Reply

Comments left by AfC reviewers

edit
  •   Comment: We have a problem here. The subject is likely a notable academic, and this could, technically, be accepted and allowed to take its chance in mainspace. Our role is to accept drafts which we think have a better than 50% chance of surviving an immediate deletion process. As written and referenced I view its chances as close to 50% for survival, but below that
    Why?
    Because you have not given a single reference that shows the following:
    For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.
    I'm willing to accept the draft on the basis of likely notability, but please, just one really good reference and it will make reviewing it a lot easier. Talk to me on my talk page if it will help you. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 07:17, 5 August 2024 (UTC)Reply
  •   Comment: It doesn't seem like you've changed anything since the last review. Please take the reviews as a way to improve the article before it gets looked at again. LR.127 (talk) 05:58, 5 August 2024 (UTC)Reply