Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jozef Maynard Borja Erece

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 delete. czar 18:29, 17 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jozef Maynard Borja Erece (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Fails WP:BLP1E. No evidence that in addition to graduating law school at a young age he is notable as a lawyer. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC) AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Agreed. There is nothing about this entry that seems notable and seems solely an individual effort to promote a particular individual.DocFreeman24 (talk) 18:48, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 15:59, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment There is one article in a regional New Zealand newspaper, the Waikato Times, about him being the youngest qualified lawyer. Not enough to reach notability on its own though. NealeFamily (talk) 09:41, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Please Keep/Disagree with proposed deletion with Nealefamily points of fact comment: Other articles of notability apart from waikato times include 9 news and media (Australia). refer to link https://www.9news.com.au/national/18-year-old-becomes-youngest-law-graduate-in-australian-history/c0522499-2d31-4b5d-90d9-4f6592b1f2e9

Philippine Canadian Inquirer link http://www.canadianinquirer.net/2015/04/22/australias-youngest-law-graduate-is-an-18-year-old-filipino/

Legal cheek from the UK (lawyers and law student sites Uk) link https://www.legalcheek.com/2015/09/an-18-year-old-kid-has-qualified-as-a-solicitor/

Australasian lawyer magazine link https://www.thelawyermag.com/au/news/general/18-year-old-law-graduate-one-of-the-youngest-ever/198107

• Please keep/Disagree with proposed deletion to aleatory ponderings on points of fact referring to notability guidelines : On Wikipedia, notability is a test used by editors to decide whether a given topic warrants its own article. For people, the person who is the topic of a biographical article should be "worthy of notice"[1] or "note"[2]—that is, "remarkable"[2] or "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded"[1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.24.67.221 (talk) 11:47, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have voted twice already. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 16:00, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete being the youngest person to receive a law degree in a particular place is nota a sign of notability. Also, we generally discount human interest stories as showing notability which some of the sources clearly are.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I was going to "vote" for Keeping the article. However, the arguments of the community convienced me. The person slightly fails to meet basic WP criteria. It's not about age or lack of sources, but about general notability. --Synhuliak (talk) 18:38, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Barely found anything about him aside from being the youngest law graduate, an indication of WP:BLP1E. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 16:00, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Working on adding verifiable references as objectively as possible to work out problems on neutral point of view. Suggest improvements on article please rather than deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.24.67.221 (talk) Moving out-of-place IP comment AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:03, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • IP, please put any future comments at the bottom of the page, as opposed to disrupting my nomination statement. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 16:03, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete — Per solid rationale by AleatoryPonderings, this is a classic example of WP:BLP1E. Celestina007 (talk) 19:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I guess the question is then, does it satisfy each of the three conditions? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.24.67.221 (talk) 21:37, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. Google also returns "About 876 results" only, which is somehow an indicator that the subject isn't notable. HiwilmsTalk 12:52, 17 October 2020 (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.