Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Inma Puig

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. Consensus that NONENG sources are sufficient for notability (non-admin closure) Aszx5000 (talk) 00:58, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Inma Puig

[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)

The only mention on this biography is that she was psychologist of Barcelona and nothing else. It may be WP:AB, clearly nothing to pass WP:ANYBIO. She has written some books, and she had some media coverage as psychologist of Barcelona, but without any kind of significant impact. Most sources are quite promotional-like, mainly because of her involvement with sports. Chiserc (talk) 09:51, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Psychology, and Spain. Chiserc (talk) 09:51, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - One of most prominent an maybe the most football psychologist, with many sources such as [1] from El Pais, one of Spain's leading newspapers... and [2] from Galicia's leading newspaper... Article needs improvement, not deletion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 11:05, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I am not convinced on the notability of this psychologist, since most articles reflect a limited geographic scope (only Spain). In that sense, a Spanish-language Wikipedia version may be more suitable based on current sources. The source you mentioned is actually an interview, if I understood correctly, and, indeed, she is covered by media, but most sources I found are promotional-like coverage and nothing to validate clearly WP:GNG. Chiserc (talk) 13:08, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The "interviews" have secondary coverage... Also I'm pretty sure using "most articles reflect a limited geographic scope (only Spain). In that sense, a Spanish-language Wikipedia version may be more suitable based on current sources" is an invalid and bizarre reason to delete an English wikipedia page... She is one of the most prominent if not the most prominent football psychologist... Article needs improvement, not deletion Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 13:30, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Giant Snowman 18:36, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think there's enough out there to show notability. Article needs an expansion/re-write to demonstrate this. Giant Snowman 18:40, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Spanish-language sources seem sufficient to show notability. Notability does not depend on language. If you can't check the sources available in a relevant language, ask someone to help, don't go to AfD. Telling people who object to your AfD to leave to Spanish Wikipedia is discriminatory and unhelpful. See WP:NONENG. Akakievich (talk) 17:56, 16 June 2023 (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.