Frédéric Genta: The reasons for that deletion remain in this version.  The author portrays Genta as a politician, but there's no evidence they are an elected official, merely a civil servant - a chief digital officer .  As the previous AfD said, CDOs are unlikely to be notable.  As for the sources, they are press releases, interviews or mere mentions.  Curb Safe Charmer ( talk ) 16:55, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Technology ,  and Europe .  Curb Safe Charmer ( talk ) 16:55, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Monaco has a population of 39,000, and he is a minor civil servant.  Clearly fails WP:GNG .  Edwardx ( talk ) 17:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:20, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : He doesn't appear be (or was) an elected official, just a high ranking person in the ministry [16] .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:17, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Oaktree b he is an elected official and his department has 100 employees per THIS and other articles I have presented in my KEEP argument below.  The article states "The creation of the position of Frédéric Genta. Its mission, with its team of 100 people: to develop a digital administration, make Monaco a smart city and a smart country, by promoting e-education, e-health, and e-security, and accelerate the environmental transition."  Further, check these 2 official Government appointment docs 1 , 2 Rustypenguin ( talk ) 20:40, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Rustypenguin, those sources confirm that he has been appointed by the Prince, for a two-year period, to do a job, rather than being a democratically elected politician.  In Wikipedia, we don't write biographies about people who are merely doing their job.  Curb Safe Charmer ( talk ) 13:00, 4 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : He's featured in media quite a bit [17] , [18] , but always giving interviews or talking about digitial initiatives within the government.  I don't see a FR wiki article about him, which I'd expect as Monaco is mostly a French-speaking country.  He appears to be the face of the digital initiatives of the government, a spokesperson more than anything.  Somewhat promo, I don't see GNG.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:21, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : He is an appointed politician and as such he meets WP:POLITICIAN .  Check these links for further verification 1 , 2 and 3 .  Politicians do not need to be elected to considered a politician , so the nominators reasoning is not valid.  In addition, there are several news articles that would prove his notability, such as Monaco Tribune - Significant coverage, Reliable Source Harvard Business Journal - Not an interview, only has some quotations, but 50% of content is journalist written.  Reliable Source gouv.mc - Article about his government appointment.  Reliable Source.  monacolife.net - Good coverage.  Reliable Source.  Rustypenguin ( talk ) 20:34, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] We have a specific guideline on notability of politicians ( WP:NPOL ) and he doesn't meet that criteria.  He is a government official, not a member of the legislature .  For sources to contribute towards notability, they need to be independent of the source.  The Harvard article is for alumni to promote themselves; the gouv.mc article is from his employer; the monacolife.net article is attributed at the bottom to "Monaco Life with press release" - press releases are not independent.  Curb Safe Charmer ( talk ) 13:10, 4 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Not a cabinet minister, so no WP:NPOL passage.  I'm not seeing WP:GNG in the sources in the article nor what I found in a search.  The sources provided above are not convincing either; for example, the participant above claims that this source provides WP:SIGCOV of the subject, but it simply does not.  Curbon7 ( talk ) 21:53, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - He has a lot of coverage.   Meets WP:BASIC .   He has coverage on Le Figaro and Le Monde which are 2 of the largest French publications.  Additionally, he is also here and here .   Per WP:BASIC, even if a subject does not have significant coverage in one publication, multiple publications can be combined to show notability.  Maxcreator ( talk ) 21:00, 4 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Maxcreator : as three of the four sources you've introduced are subscriber-only, can you clarify whether any of them - and if so which - are about Genta, rather than articles about the digitalisation of Monaco that mention him or quote him?  Curb Safe Charmer ( talk ) 09:31, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - While Mr. Genta might not qualify under  ( WP:NPOL ) criteria he definetely qualifies under ( WP:BASIC ) There are multiple independent sources available, and some of them listed in the article, as well as additional not listed.  I quickly checked those sources and they are reliable (leading french-speaking media organizations), independent of each other since they are competitors , and independent of Mr Genta.  This should be enough to fulfill the basic criteria.  A quick google search retrieved articles about the work done by his office as well, including some from the Monaco government, as some recent interviews at BFM Business [19] , a national TV focus on business in France and an interview at France Info [20] .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chamalejo ( talk • contribs ) 18:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:NPOL , and I don't see a single source that's not either press release churnalism or an interview.  The Le Figaro article, for instance, isn't coverage of him - it's just a quote, and I don't really believe WP:BASIC applies to articles where people just get quotes - it's a very flimsy argument for keeping an article because it necessarily assumes WP:GNG isn't met.  This is very promotional, the sources are only really on him when it's a press release, and reads sort of like a CV, which is a huge red flag for me for a BLP.  SportingFlyer T · C 00:36, 9 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] What is the specific element in this article that makes it "promotional"?   The person in question leads an office within the Monaco government that is at the cabinet level and coordinates across ministries within the [Council of Government|Council_of_Government] as such, it is a notable position.  Mr Genta role seems similar to the USA CIO currently filled by Clare_Martorana , her article is similar in simplicity and the references included are mainly related to her appointment.  Also, very similar in content and references, the previous USA CIO Suzette_Kent .  These examples are appointed, inter-secretary cabinet positions that are considered notable.  I don't see why the decision should be different in this case.  Chamalejo ( talk ) 05:13, 9 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not sure either of those people are notable either, but the career section is written sort of like an extended CV.  SportingFlyer T · C 06:09, 9 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - subject is a government official with enough reliable coverage such as 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 and 6 .  Bradelykooper ( talk ) 09:02, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Interviews don't count towards notability, and the other coverage is just reporting on him getting a role (like a press release) or just quotes him (not SIGCOV).  I stand by my delete after that source review.  SportingFlyer T · C 21:38, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] 1- None of these are press releases.  I do not see that any say press release on it or that an identical press release exists that it was copied from.  They are news stories.  2- None are 100% interviews.One is partially interview and partially original commentary.  2 have a few quotations and the other 3 have no quotations at all.  Bradelykooper ( talk ) 15:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] [21] is routine business news that would have been generated from something like a press release.  Others are articles where a newspaper calls him up and gets a quote on a topic from him, which is not significant coverage - you don't get a Wikipedia article because newspapers call you for quotations.  SportingFlyer T · C 16:19, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Most news originates from press releases.  However, when media outlets do not publish these releases verbatim and instead report on them, the content is transformed into a news article.  This is a common practice for initiating news; companies announce new products, mergers, and other significant developments, prompting publications to write about these topics.  As long as the press release is not published in its entirety as originally provided, it is considered a news article, not a press release.  I do not know why you are trying so hard to discredit a notable government appointed official.  I also note that another voter has brought up WP:BASIC , which states: "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability;" Bradelykooper ( talk ) 18:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Bradelykooper : We are not discrediting the individual.  What we are doing here is assessing the extent to which the subject meets the criteria that the Wikipedia community has come up with over years of refinement to determine whether or not there should be an entry about him in an encyclopedia.  I think you may have overlooked the part of WP:BASIC that says that to count towards notability, the sources need to be WP:SECONDARY , meaning providing thought and reflection - analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources - rather than just regurgitating a news release or quoting what Genta says.  Curb Safe Charmer ( talk ) 19:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Shadow311 ( talk ) 20:02, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Shadow311 ( talk ) 22:39, 17 April 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete