Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Milenka Peña

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 14:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Milenka Peña

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

The journalist is not notable, with 90% of the information added lacking any sources. Cinder painter (talk) 12:13, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Journalism, and Illinois. Shellwood (talk) 12:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio, Television, and Bolivia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:11, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Radio and television journalists are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG — but this article has no footnotes at all to establish GNG, and instead just provides a contextless stack of external links to primary and unreliable sources that are not support for notability. As always, the key to making a journalist notable enough for a Wikipedia article is not to reference it to content self-published by her own employers (which is what most of the external links here are) — it's to show evidence that her work has been externally validated as significant through coverage about her in third party sources that didn't issue her paycheques. Bearcat (talk) 18:45, 10 January 2025 (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.