Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jovita Fontanez

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. Tone 18:40, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jovita Fontanez

[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)

Minor political figure. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL. Hirolovesswords (talk) 05:04, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:47, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:47, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:47, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - revisions to the article, including the addition of multiple sources and incorporation of a source already in the article demonstrates WP:BASIC notability, as well as WP:NPOL notability, i.e. Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage, specifically footnote 8, A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists. Her political and community activist career has been extensive and multi-faceted, and she is included in the Centro de Estudios Puertorriqueños at Hunter College of the City University of New York. Beccaynr (talk) 17:02, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 07:08, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - article has been substantially revised since listing for deletion and the added content and citations clearly demonstrate notability of the subject. --Zeborah (talk) 10:51, 29 June 2021 (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.