Deletion of Actualidades

Comment: This is not a magazine as indicated, but actually a blog. The site appears to have received a few cursory reviews, and the mention is ''Hispania'' is likely the closest to a ; however, the mention at the other two websites (ACTFL, Cafe Pedagogique) are ostensibly culled collections of links with trivial mentions and very little to convey notability. (Not every site that a "what to watch"-type page picks up has inherent notability.) The "signficant coverage" aspect of  does not appear to have been met. Also possibly a  issue, as the user name of the author of this article leads me to believe he is the creator of this site
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:COI)

Comment: the threshold for Wikipedia notability is not existence, but ''significant coverage in |reliable sources that are independent of the subject''. The ''Hispania'' review is a start, as it is a third party source that is reliable. However, the coverage must also be non-trivial; that is, a mere ''appearance'' is not enough, which is a problem with the other sources provided. As mentioned above, the ACTFL link you provide is a list of links with a few brief sentence about this and about a dozen other topics (the same seems to be the case for the Cafe Pedagogique link). Likewise, the ''independent'' clause is important; looking at the FLAG website, the http://www.flageorgia.org/conference/2010Conference/2010ScheduleAtaGlance-MailoutFinal.pdf conference schedule would seem to indicate that you are the one who presented about it, and thus this does not help to establish notability; indeed, looking at your resume (which is freely available online; for privacy's sake I will not link to it here), you also were the presenter about this topic at the other conferences you mention, which is the same issue. (Using passive voice to say that it has "been the subject" of these presentations is somewhat misleading... being up front about things would be welcome here, please.) I would recommend looking at the links to  and , as well as , to see what kind of sourcing would be needed. The key is, as stated above, ''significant coverage in |reliable sources that are independent of the subject''. I hope this helps
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:RS||WP:WEB||WP:RS)

Comment: Yes it is both a website and a magazine but neither are notable enough and/or have enough reliable sources to have an article on Wikipedia. Heck, it doesn't have an article in the Spanish Wikipedia! Also, the author may have a |conflict of interest
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI)