Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Federico de la Plana
Just to be clear, the reason we accept legislators as automatically notable is because |reliable source coverage of them is ''certain'' to exist. Even if the article is inadequately sourced as written, we know for a ''fact'' that the article can be ''repaired'' because media coverage will always exist somewhere. But we can't hand the same automatic presumption of notability to constitutional convention delegates, because there's not a sufficient ''guarantee'' that the depth of coverage needed to get them over  will exist anywhere — it might, certainly, but it also might not. So they can't be a class of topic where we keep the article ''regardless'' of its current state of sourcing — they're a class of topic where tracking down sufficient sources upfront has to come first, as a basic precondition of the article even being allowed to exist at all. But the only source present here is a glancing namecheck of his existence, in the context of handing somebody an envelope, and that's not enough by itself. As well, the article says he was a mayor, but ''fails'' to say what town or city he was the mayor ''of'' — but mayors don't get an automatic presumption of notability just for existing either, but rather their includability is at least partially dependent on the size of the town or city (although ultimately their ''sourceability'' more than anything else). So no prejudice against recreation in the future ''if'' somebody puts in enough work to ''show'' that he's more sourceable than this, but nothing here entitles him to a ''presumption'' of notability in the ''absence'' of better sourcing than this
— User:Bearcat, 15:59, 28 August 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)