Deletion of Octaviano Tenorio

Comment: The subject has achieved more than President of the Missionary Training Center in Mexico. He achieved a global or international leadership position beginning in 2007. http://www.deseretnews.com/article/660207880/Changes-in-church-leadership.html?pg=all, which I think I essentially said before. This seems to translate into having significant impact and appears to pass  #2''':''' "'' The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:ANYBIO)

Comment: fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per nom. |Independent sources are a must to confer notability. If the subject were notable I'd have no problem retaining the LDS media sources as citations but they can't pass GNG
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything (WP:42)

Comment: Squeaks in under , arguably. I added two refs to the ''Deseret News'', which the ''Deseret News'' is owned by a church, but so is the ''Christian Science Monitor'' and they are both reliable and notable sources of general news -- although granted the ''Deseret News'' does also include Mormon church news (but then, that's important to life in Salt Lake City no matter what your persuasion). One of the sources has a couple sentences about him, but also quotes him, and the entire article is, while not about him, about the Missionary Training Center of which he is the head. The other source is a full mini-biography talking about his posts and his familiy and what have you
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Clearly fails . The article's creator
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: After reviewing the sources, this doesn't pass GNG or any other notability criteria.  is an argument to avoid unless you can relate ''why'' it's useful to relevant policies and guidelines
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ITSIMPORTANT)

Comment: barely passes 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: It occurs to me that if this discussion closes as keep, editors will have succeeded in creating a de facto  without doing the work or getting broad community consensus for an actual 
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SNG||WP:SNG)