Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos F. Rivas

Carlos F. Rivas

Notability concerns. He is a non-notable mid-level leader in a church: an "area seventy" in the LDS Church. As far as area seventies go, there are several hundred in the world; it is a part-time volunteer position; they serve on a volunteer basis for 5 or so years, i.e., there is no life tenure. Major sources are limited to the Church News and a book, both of which are published by Deseret Morning News, which is an entity owned by the LDS Church. Other sources are passing mentions on the internet regarding his service in the church. I can't find a source which even says he is the only Salvadoran that olds the office of "seventy" of the church, so that is probably based on WP:OR. Other similar articles on area seventies have been deleted after discussion; see here, here, here, here, and here. (This article was tagged with {PROD} based on these precedents, but creator removed {PROD} without providing reasons in the edit summary or on talk page.) Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:37, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You have not dealt with the fact that Rivas is distict and different from those mentioned above. As the head of an agency related to Enterprise Mentoring, Rivas has notability as a business man in El Salvador.Johnpacklambert (talk) 03:46, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's notable for this as demonstrated by what non-LDS Church related sources? Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 03:54, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- VG ☎ 03:48, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. -- VG ☎ 03:48, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Keep", The previous precednet are based on inadequate understanding of the role of Area Seventies. What do you mean by saying it is "voluntary". Does this mean if the position were to be full time and with clear ability to be assigned by church leaders anywhere in the world it would be acceptable. I also think that your insistance that a source has no value if it is not LDS related is unsupportable. The fact is that Enterpeise is an independent organization that is not controlled by the LDS Church. People leading it have validity. Also, I have in the article cited sources that have no connection to the LDS church and in fact do not even understand the LDS Church and so misrepresent events, but they clearly show that due to his interactions with the president of El Salvador, Rivas has become noted as the voice of the church in El Salvador. I have to object to the current assumptions about independence in Wikipedia, because these give anti-LDS sources a preference over LDS sources. This anti-establishment bias is als evident in other contexts, but it is a bias, and should not be given such great support.Johnpacklambert (talk) 04:04, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is a part-time, volunteer position. Meaning the people who do it keep their regular employment and do area seventy duties in their spare time and without remuneration. That's just one factor that can help editors assess the importance of this position and those who hold it. No one in the position even does it full time, so it gets trickier to say holding that position confers notability. I nominated the previous ones for deletion and, believe me, I fully understand the role of area seventies in the LDS Church. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally the attack on anything that is "LDS Church Related" has now included a disbarring of use of Mridian Magazine as an independent source. However this magazine is neither controlled nor operated by the LDS Church, and so should be considered independent, with its statements given equal weight with any other independent publication. Unless the people in question are on the board of Meridian or operate it, than clearly they are not in control of it.Johnpacklambert (talk) 04:07, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a question of "anti-LDS" bias—and who said Meridian was disbarred from anything? I don't appreciate the insinuation that I (or is it someone else?) am performing an "attack on anything that is LDS Church related". I would appreciate some assumptions of good faith. It's just that to establish notability we need sources that do so that are not controlled by the LDS Church. Meridian is not controlled by the LDS Church, but look at his mention in that source: it's tiny—only his name and age and place of residence are mentioned in a list of area seventies beginning their tenure. Good Ol’factory ^(talk) 04:25, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete. As it stands, this is a biographical account of Señor Rivas's involvement with the LDS, but it makes no claim as to how or why that involvement is notable, or of sufficient note to be considered for inclusion as encyclopaedic. I do not consider this article meets WP:BIO in its present form. Eddie.willers (talk) 12:06, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Considering that people in calling for the deletion of aricles on Area Authority Seventies have used attack words like "cult" I feel no reason to assume good faith. It is evident that some of the people who seek the deletion of these articles do so to advance their anti-LDS goals. It is also very frustrating to see the work and effort I have put in to creating articles like this totally disregarded. I have to admit in some ways I am most frustrated by the deletion of the article on Wolfgang Paul, where we had a full time position, mentions from books that were prepared without church supervision, many mentions of his role as first mission president in East Germany, and I had pointed out another book that is sure to have mentioned him even more, but people just dissed the whole thing. I guess I am most frustrated by the assumption that mention in artacles in the Church News, no matter how in depth and no matter how often, and no matter the fact that these may reflect the fact that meetings in Utah recognize the efforts of Carlos Rivas in helping people in El Salvador, that none of this is seen as mentions and notice that is independent of Rivas. You may claim a lack of bias, but you insulting tone in response to my statement about him being a noted business man in El Salvador is not the type of thing that says you accept any validity on the part of the Church News.Johnpacklambert (talk) 18:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]