Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Spain

Shortcuts

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Spain. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Spain|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Spain. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Europe.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Spain/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spain

Scan for Spain related AfDs

Scan for Spain related Prods
Scan for Spain related TfDs

Spain

Communist Party of the Valencian Country – Revolutionary Marxist

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

Either a duplicate of Communist Party of the Valencian Country or not notable Chidgk1 (talk) 12:06, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Spain. Chidgk1 (talk) 12:06, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:28, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tertulia de Creadores

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

I could not find sources that address the topic directly and exhaustively, either in English or in Spanish. The Spanish article on Wikipedia has the same issue; no indication of notability. JohnMizuki (talk) 11:19, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Spain. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 11:28, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am absolutely opposed to the deletion. The article is relevant, these literary gatherings are a fundamental part of Spanish literature and —I would add— of universal literature in Spanish. A simple internet search yields numerous sources that discuss the topic. I would also like to point out that the user who initiated this AfD also opened a CdB on eswiki, similarly claiming that "the article didn't seem relevant and that they couldn't find references on the subject" — references which, quite clearly, do exist. CarlosEduardoPA (talk) 17:46, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Telephone numbers in Melilla

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

Wikipedia is not a database. This can just be merged into the article for Melilla, why is disconnected information about the city its own page? Yelps ᘛ⁠⁐̤⁠ᕐ⁠ᐷ critique me 16:41, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Spain. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:30, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy redirect to Telephone numbers in Spain, and do the same with Telephone numbers in Ceuta and Telephone numbers in the Canary Islands, baffling why these would be separate articles. Reywas92^Talk 19:40, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because it resembles a colony, and the numbering system may not be identical to that of mainland Spain. It would be helpful if the article were to include the number ranges assigned to landlines, mobile numbers (broken down by carrier if necessary), short numbers such as 112 and other codes that are more or less standardized in the European Union, and carrier selection codes such as 10288 for AT&T in the United States. Removing this article would leave a red link in Telephone numbers in Africa. I wonder whether the Morocco telephone numbering system has reserved a range of domestic prefixes or dialling codes to reach Melilla from Morocco, even if they are not in use. The numbering system of the People's Republic of China, for example, reserves a range of numbers for Taiwan, and Republic of Ireland numbering system used to allow numbers in Northern Ireland to be called with a different prefix rather than the United Kingdom's country code of 44. LeapTorchGear (talk) 01:38, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- What does "may not be identical to that of mainland Spain" mean??? Do you have any evidence of that or just speculation??? You know Melilla is an integral part of Spain, not a colony? Even if they were different, Telephone numbers in Spain is perfectly capable of describing whatever you're spouting about. A redirect would not leave a red link. — Reywas92^Talk 13:13, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of incidents of violence against women in Spain

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

Per WP:SALAT, this is far too general a topic to make a manageable list. (List of incidents of violence against women is also up for Afd.) Clarityfiend (talk) 08:39, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime, Lists, and Spain. Shellwood (talk) 09:11, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:NLIST. Nearly all of the listed incidents are non-notable. Wareon (talk) 12:37, 23 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ADN (newspaper)

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

Contested prod; page unreferenced since creation in 2008, none of the sources present in the Spanish and Galician articles serve to establish notability, article matter does not meet WP:GNG being a defunct short-lived free newspaper. Coeusin (talk) 00:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Spain. Coeusin (talk) 00:07, 12 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As per newspaper and It Didn't show general notability guidelines and significant coverage about the topic. ~~and unsourced as well.~~ Fade258 (talk) 13:08, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as easily meets WP:GNG. Significant coverage about ADN, a newspaper published nationally in Spain from 2006 to 2011, already present in the Spanish version of the article (and added to the English version now) include multiple articles in major national newspaper El País (longer article in 2009 and shorter article in 2011). Also added a 2011 article from El Mundo, the second largest daily newspaper in Spain; and a 2010 academic journal article, "Free newspapers: perceptions, consumption habits and news reading preferences of Basque Journalism Students", published in Estudios Sobre el Mensaje Periodistico, which discusses ADN. Haven't added it yet, but there's even a 2011 academic journal article "Typography and colour: A comparative analysis of the free and paid-for newspapers in Spain" in Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, where it is one of the four newspapers analysed in depth. (Log in to ProQuest first via Wikipedia Library and those links should work.) The assertion that "article does not meet WP:GNG being a defunct short-lived newspaper" is a value judgment (an invalid argument per WP:IDONTLIKEIT) and not actually policy-based; saying that five years is "short-lived" is subjective; re: "defunct", nothing lasts forever and if we didn't cover organizations that closed or battles that ended or people who died, there would be no coverage of history on Wikipedia. Request reconsideration by editor Fade258 who makes no mention of any WP:BEFORE search; please note that the second part of WP:NEWSNOTE actually allows for other criteria based on WP:GNG. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:26, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Cielquiparle, thanks for the very passionate contributions here. The academic paper on free media and Basque students is an interesting find (discussing ADN as one amongst many free papers that circulated with that public), but I maintain my position. The article (via the sources available) establishes that the newspaper closed; because it closed, it had to be open. Then there is the list of cities in which it purportedly circulated, but no years in which it circulated in any of them. These cities are extremely different from each other and each would have news that would be relevant to them and not to the others, so would require exclusive journalists in them and not in Barcelona (which supposedly is the city it was headquartered at). However, we can't know that, because none of the sources offer WP:SIGCOV regarding the paper's function and its notable characteristics: they are simply WP:ROUTINE. I could create literally hundreds of articles about Paraguayan newspapers (my expertise) saying "they opened in x, closed in y, and ran only in Asunción", backed by WP:RS, and that would benefit exactly no one. That is the same contribution this article makes, and that is a given, because the paper fails WP:GNG and specifically WP:NEWSNOTE (noting that the second part of newsnote, as mentioned, are only good things to consider). Cheers, Coeusin (talk) 09:07, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Actually @Coeusin the coverage actually does provide more detail about several specific localities, distribution dates and numbers (within the actual text of the articles, though not every single locality is mentioned), as well as stats for its online portal. More importantly, it's a misrepresentation to suggest that the coverage only mentions opening and closing in passing within a single sentence; there is analysis given in major newspapers about the circumstances of both particularly in light of the Spanish financial crisis, the decline in advertising, and the competition that the publication faced. It's especially interesting that the digital portal was closed given its high level of traffic, but that the online newspaper continued; there is commentary about that too. (Somehow I'm not entirely convinced you've logged in to read any of these articles.) (And per WP:NEWSNOTE I would add, it specifically says Its launch or demise is covered in other newspapers in its region or covering a similar topic.) Cielquiparle (talk) 09:45, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle, that's not what I'm suggesting (the single sentence bit). I read the sources from the Spanish/Galician articles before I created this AfD; I just browsed through both academic papers you introduced (the one on typography I just didn't judge worth mentioning). I maintain my points, seeing as you did not deign to address them directly. Coeusin (talk) 10:16, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah I find it pretty tedious to keep improving the article and then commenting here. But the good news is that your feedback has, at the very least, led to further article improvements and expansion. You are correct in your scepticism that maintaining editorial staff and distribution in so many cities probably was not economically viable over the long term, and we can see this come through in some of the coverage about staff cuts in various regional offices. I've also incorporated some detail from the journal article about how ADN differentiated itself from the other three most highly circulated free newspapers in Spain. I'll try to spend a bit more time on this later (as it still doesn't do justice to the wealth of information provided in the sources). You've made it very clear you refuse to change your position; but in any case it's up to the community to decide. Cheers and happy editing. Cielquiparle (talk) 10:51, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed. I respect your contributions, the effort you put in here and elsewhere is not up to question. Cheers, happy editing to you too. Coeusin (talk) 14:56, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also pinging A. B. who de-prodded. Cielquiparle (talk) 04:27, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

When I mention my opinion about this article there were no references as I already stated it in my above comment. Well, I already checked the WP:BEFORE but forget to mention it and I also noticed that you had improved and added the references as part of the unreferenced article backlog drive, which is good. I will rewiew it once again and by tonight I will give my opinion once again. Thank you ! Fade258 (talk) 08:31, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for late response. Due to technical issues from my side on reviewing/viewing that added references so, I am striking that unsourced comment only and waiting for community on what they says about it. Thank You! Fade258 (talk) 13:06, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per my own earlier search and reading the references listed in the Galician and Spanish Wikipedia articles as I noted in my edits to the article when I removed the PROD tag. Decisively notable. —A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 13:04, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep: For a Newspaper company that has existed for serval years, it’s considered notable Also, found on Google news tab the content on the website are verifiable. Allblessed (talk) 08:14, 18 June 2025 (UTC) [reply]

@Allblessed, that's not the same newspaper as the one the article is talking about. Coeusin (talk) 15:36, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for broader participation. BD2412 T 03:33, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BD2412 T 03:33, 20 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article is notable --Unclethepoter (talk) 21:40, 24 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Spain

Spain

Communist Party of the Valencian Country – Revolutionary Marxist

Tertulia de Creadores

Telephone numbers in Melilla

List of incidents of violence against women in Spain

ADN (newspaper)

Others

Categories

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Templates

See also