Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Brazil

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Brazil. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Brazil|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Brazil. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to South America.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Purge page cache watch


Brazil

[edit]

Universidade Franciscana

[edit]
Universidade Franciscana (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ths doesn't seem to meet WP:ORG or WP:GNG, or have a good WP:ATD. Boleyn (talk) 08:15, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alexandre Oliva

[edit]
Alexandre Oliva (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP: N. The only sources I could find about him are tied to the FSF, GNU, or make passing mentions of his name in routine coverage that is almost entirely about Linux-libre. Since notability is not transitive, this article should be deleted. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:48, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This article was dePRODed on the basis that he received a "prestigious award". This "prestigious award" is given by the FSF, which is an organization that the article and the PROD rationale makes very clear that he is a part of. Regardless, this was dePRODed without the addition of independent sources, so this goes to AfD. HyperAccelerated (talk) 14:51, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: nothing for this person found, there is an author Alexandra Oliva, which isn't this person. I don't see any acceptable sources used either, as the nom explains. Oaktree b (talk) 16:03, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Brazil. Shellwood (talk) 16:12, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Oliva clearly meets items 1. and 2. of WP:ANYBIO ("has received a well-known and significant award" plus "has made a widely recognized contribution ... in a specific field"). The fact that he is part of the Free Software movement does not diminish the merit of his award in any way. It just stands as proof that his life-long contributions were acknowledged by his peers.
He is cited as reference or acknowledged in several books in a period spanning almost three decades:
  • Fourth International Conference on Configurable Distributed Systems - Proceedings, by IEEE Computer Society (1998)
  • The International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, by Mohamed G. Gouda (1999)
  • Unix backup and recovery, by W. Curtis Preston (1999)
  • Windows to Linux Migration Toolkit - Your Windows to Linux Extreme Makeover, by David Allen (2004)
  • Backup & Recovery - Inexpensive Backup Solutions for Open Systems, by W. Curtis Preston (2007)
  • Actor-network Theory and Technology Innovation - Advancements and New Concepts, by Arthur Tatnall (2011)
  • Cybersecurity - A Self-Teaching Introduction, by C. P. Gupta, K. K. Goyal (2020)
  • Coding Democracy - How Hackers Are Disrupting Power, Surveillance, and Authoritarianism, by Maureen Webb (2021)
  • A Propriedade Intelectual do Software - análise histórica e crítica, by Rodrigo L Canalli (2021)
  • Introduction to Intellectual Property Rights (IPR), by Yash Pratap Singh Narwaria, Dr. Maulik K Rathod, Anindita Dutta Roy, Tanmay Agrawal (2024)
He was one of the co-founders of Free Software Foundation Latin America [1] in 2005, and still is one of its board members [2]. As a promoter of free software, he has given dozens of lectures in Brazil (this governamental site lists just a few) and abroad. —capmo (talk) 00:16, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Acknowledgements or mentions in books are not a measure of notability under Wikipedia’s guidelines. Do not throw random citations and random lectures at us and hope that one or two of them sticks. HyperAccelerated (talk) 02:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The award that you keep citing is tied to an organization Oliva is actively part of—it is not an independent honor and does not count at all towards notability. His membership in the Free Software movement does not establish notability either, because notability is not transitive. HyperAccelerated (talk) 02:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You have shown absolutely nothing to demonstrate that WP: ANYBIO is met, but even if you did, the guideline very clearly states that "meeting one or more [of the standards] does not guarantee that a subject should be included". Show me significant coverage from sources that meet WP: RS, or this content doesn’t belong here. HyperAccelerated (talk) 02:41, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
PS: Oliva also meets item 3. of WP:ANYBIO, having an entry at the National Library of Brazil [3]. —capmo (talk) 00:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Quit bludgeoning. This is not a "standard national biographical dictionary". It's a database of authors (who might have authored books that are preserved in the National Library?). Either way, it's certainly not biographical, because the page only contains the title of one work, and it's certainly not standard. HyperAccelerated (talk) 03:00, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, please come back to us with reliable sources that cover the subject in-depth. Or don't. You seem to be ignoring this request (or anything I have to say, for that matter), so I don't really know why I'm still entertaining any of this. HyperAccelerated (talk) 03:00, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The link I provided is from the Brazilian National Authority Control, maintained by the National Library (Biblioteca Nacional, the bn in the link). Even the entry on Machado de Assis, one of Brazilian greatest writers, returns just a couple of lines [4]. What I'm trying to say with this is that in this case, length is no parameter for the subject's importance. Being in the list is enough proof of notability. —capmo (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - a made up in one day award for up and coming but ultimately run of the mill activist, writer, and graduate student . Bearian (talk) 06:07, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Made up in one day award? This is ridiculous! It's the FSF Free Software Awards! Dozens of people and organizations (including Wikipedia itself, what an irony!) have been granted it. Are you going to propose the deletion of their articles too? —capmo (talk) 04:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    This has been explained over and over again, in the PROD, AfD rationale, and multiple delete votes: the FSF award doesn’t establish notability because it’s from an organization that the subject is a board member of. Your behavior is rapidly devolving into bludgeoning. I'm asking you kindly to WP: LISTEN to us or let the discussion move forward. HyperAccelerated (talk) 15:00, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You're falsifying the facts to reinforce your arguments. He received his award in 2016; he only became a board member of FSF in 2019! I'll quote below a paragraph from the announcement so you can get your facts straight:

    A longtime free software activist and founder of FSF Latin America, Oliva brings decades of experience in the free software movement to the FSF board. In the community, he is held in especially high regard for being the chief developer of the GNU Linux-libre project, a version of the kernel Linux that removes all nonfree bits from the kernel's source code, enabling users around the world to run fully free versions of the GNU/Linux operating system, and is a program of vital importance in the cause for software freedom. For his deep commitment and tireless work in free software, Oliva was the recipient of the 2016 Advancement of Free Software award given annually by the FSF. Aside from being a contributor to the GNU Project since 1993, Oliva is an accomplished public speaker and author on the importance of software freedom.

    I really don't see the purpose in deleting an article on someone that's clearly notable in his field. You ask me to "listen" to you, but you don't seem to be willing to do the same. Please do what you kindly suggested me and just let the discussion move forward. We already know your opinion, let's hear from others, please. —capmo (talk) 00:40, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, and the very first sentence of your quote says that he founded FSF Latin America, which existed all the way back in 2005 (cite). He was affiliated with the FSF when he received the award, so the award does not count towards notability and the article should be deleted. Thanks and goodbye. HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Oh, and by the way, accusing someone of "falsifying facts" because they disagree with you isn't funny. I was hoping you'd be willing to discuss this civilly, but those hopes seem misplaced. I'm telling you now, drop the stick. HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:08, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    FOURTEEN EDITS in a row? Have you ever heard of the Preview buttom?? ;) You seem to be taking this too seriously, try to relax a bit! Now regarding your other question: FSF and FSFLA are "sister" organizations, completely independent from one another. Again you were proven wrong in your assumption. —capmo (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    No, that's not how this works. You don't get to accuse people of acting in bad faith and then pretend like you did nothing wrong by telling them to "relax" with a winky face. This page with FSFLA's constitution says that they "act in joint concert with the other FSFs (Free Software Foundations) to promote and defend Free Software". They're not independent. Again, thanks and goodbye. HyperAccelerated (talk) 18:12, 22 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep @HyperAccelerated I think your tone is bordering on WP:UNCIVIL, and frankly I think you aren't being receptive or fair to new evidence presented to you by capmo. Take it down a notch. You can disagree without being rude or combative. In looking at google books the book from MIT Press mentions Oliva and his 2016 award but unfortunately the coverage gets cut off and is not completely viewable: see page 291 He is also thanked for his contributions to several publications: [5], [6], [7]; and mentioned in this book on cybersecurity. Here are a few books he is cited in: [8], [9] (there are several more like these) I think this lends credence to A. the significance of the FSF Free Software Award (which is erroneously being dismissed as the subject was not attached to the FSF at the time of the award but worked for a separate independent sister organization) and B. Oliva's position as a well known figure within his field. What these don't do is demonstrate WP:SIGCOV. However, the national library entry, which HyperAccelerated in bad faith dismissed as WP:BLUDGEONING, is significant to the point that I think it pushes this into the keep category. A biographical entry (even a brief one) in a national library reference resource makes a person encyclopedic under the spirit of WP:5P1. Period.4meter4 (talk) 16:00, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi, thanks for voting. I've been more than fair to capmo, especially since they accused me of lying without remorse. I'd be much nicer if they were new, but they've been around for 19 years and should know better. I also don't understand why you think I've acted in bad faith at any point during this AfD. Go to my Talk page if you think there's a problem -- I'm not going to litigate this here. HyperAccelerated (talk) 16:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    FSF and FSF Latin America are not independent entities. There is a quote from FSF Latin America's constitution that I wrote above that shows that they operate in "joint concert" with one another. Aside from putting this sentence on a bright neon sign at the top of the Burj Khalifa, can you tell me how I can make it more clear that these two organizations are not independent? HyperAccelerated (talk) 16:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The national library reference is a database. It is a directory, not a collection of biographies or an encyclopedia. It contains the name of one work that I assume Oliva wrote.
    This creates a double-bind. Either:
    1. BN is a database, not a biographical dictionary. It doesn't count towards notability.
    2. BN is actually a collection of biographies and nothing that Oliva has done is notable enough to be put in his biography. That is a very strong signal we should delete this article. HyperAccelerated (talk) 16:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The rest of your sources appear to be mentions and don't demonstrate significant coverage. HyperAccelerated (talk) 16:52, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree with your interpretation of the National Library source. You don't need to WP:BLUDGEON the process by repeating your arguments (see how I used that in the right context; ie a repeated opinion). I think I already made it clear that I agreed the sources don't constitute SIGCOV, so we agree there. I can accept your explanation on the lack of independence between the FSF and its sister organization, but the coverage in a book published by MIT seems to indicate the award has some prestige all the same. Unfortunately it is not clear whether that book has more to say on Oliva as the next page is not viewable. It may (or may not) have SIGCOV. This is a borderline call in my opinion, and I've modified to a "weak keep" based on your feedback. We'll see what others have to say. Best.4meter4 (talk) 17:23, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand why you think I've bludgeoned -- the double bind makes a new point -- but I don't think it's important. Thanks anyway. HyperAccelerated (talk) 17:28, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Bludgeoning is where someone attempts to force their point of view through a very high number of comments, such as contradicting every viewpoint that is different from their own. Typically, this means making the same argument over and over and to different people in the same discussion." You already made the same analysis on the national library source above. I can read the discussion. Repeating arguments made earlier after editors who express an opposing opinion is the specific behavior addressed on the bludgeoning page. I normally wouldn't have pointed it out (since you only did it once instead of repeatedly) but I wanted to draw your attention to the type of behavior one should look for when citing WP:BLUDGEON. When you cited it earlier, capmo was presenting a brand new source not previously examined. It wasn't a repeating argument, so it couldn't be considered bludgeoning. However, when you repeated your analysis of the library source after my keep vote, that is bludgeoning because it is a repetitive argument being made with a different editor. Understand?4meter4 (talk) 18:02, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do not use this page as a platform to write about anything besides whether or not this article should be deleted. HyperAccelerated (talk) 18:45, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rafael de Orleans e Bragança

[edit]
Rafael de Orleans e Bragança (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

All three sources in the article are passing mentions in relation to his father. Doesn't meet WP:GNG. DrKay (talk) 17:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Previous deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rafael of Orléans-Braganza. DrKay (talk) 18:04, 9 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 20:37, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - Looks like this one could be a candidate for expansion from the French-language version.[10] estar8806 (talk) ★ 01:47, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 19:57, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brazil Proposed deletions

[edit]

No articles are proposed for deletion at this time

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Brazil&oldid=1286362384"