Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hugo Pinell

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. Can as well be merged, The result is not a delete, so closing this. Tone 20:26, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hugo Pinell

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fluff article about marginally notable felon. More pertinent details surrounding his notability exist in several parent articles. ZHurlihee (talk) 15:38, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect to San Quentin Six. Pinell was involved in one of the longest and most notable trials in California history, however, I don't think he has any mainstream notability outside the escape attempt and the subsequent trial. Mini-biographies of the various inmates should be hosted at San Quentin Six. Location (talk) 16:30, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The details of why is prison don't really fit in the San Quentin Six page. He is widely mentioned in news stories (74 Ghits), books (160) and articles (15), which are enough to sustain notability. Several of these appear to have longer sections on him (e.g. [1] but unfortunately I don't have access to the full book. Finally, I would suggest that the use of the term like fluff article shows a certain lack of detachment in the nominator, whose contributions appear to be largely restricted to attempting to defend right wing figures and attacking left wing ones, which leads me to worry a little a bit bias. Francis Bond (talk) 02:21, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AGF. I would be more than happy to defend any edit I have made. ZHurlihee (talk) 13:57, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - per Francis Bond.--BabbaQ (talk) 09:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Baseball Watcher 03:06, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:29, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Why the repeated relisting when nobody but the nominator has called for deletion? Phil Bridger (talk) 23:03, 18 May 2011 (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.