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 speedy keep per WP:SNOW. The discussion has virtually no chance to result in a consensus for deletion. El_C 03:12, 17 August 2019 (UTC) reply

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst: spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst: canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst: csm|username}} or {{subst: csp|username}}.

Ignacio Anaya (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Should be a redirect to the nachos article, IP's continue to insist on separate article. Classic case of WP:BIO1E. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:14, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:14, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 ( talk) 11:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mexico-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 ( talk) 11:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep According to WP:BIO1E "However, if media coverage of both the event and the individual's role grow larger, separate articles may become justified." The Google Doodle clearly constitutes media coverage and while creation of the Nacho is the main event, reference to his son, his career, and so on indicate that there is more to Ignacio's life than just this one event, and while this is the obvious notable event his ownership of a restaurant implies that there are more things that could be added. 170.173.8.110 ( talk) 16:11, 15 August 2019 (UTC) — 170.173.8.110 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
• STFU and pass the nachos! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.95.216.222 ( talk) 14:38, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Neutral comment Vote! struck as not a vote. Nate • ( chatter) 00:41, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep I agree that that article lacks content unrelated to nachos, but there is a wealth of sources that can be used to improve that. 98.179.184.17 ( talk) 12:21, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
  • Well where are they? Powers ^T 13:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep After receiving a Google Doodle in his honor, it would be hard to argue that this article ought not to exist. Plus it contains essential biographical information that stands apart from nachos, the dish. Danmurphy2406 ( talk) 12:22, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Speedy Keep clearly notable, and does not meet the standards of WP:BIO1E.. We have TFA's for people who are notable solely for inventing a food product. I don't even like nachos, and am semi-retired from Wikipedia, but feel strongly enough to speak out on this. -- T1980 ( talk) 12:28, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep He's the subject of the 8/15/2019 Google Doodle. This article will expand as people visit it, and will be noteworthy on an ongoing basis. -- Hmcnally ( talk) 12:44, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep Per the above. I think it's a decent guess that this article will expand thanks to the Google Doodle.-- Gen. Quon (Talk) 13:20, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete. There's virtually no sourced content here, and what's here isn't encyclopedic. Tone is bad. I don't see much salvageable. Powers ^T 13:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply

• Comment. The sourcing has been materially impoved, and has more than sufficient WP:RS to meet WP:GNG. Britishfinance ( talk) 01:03, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep, but copyedit for grammar since the Google Doodle is generating a lot of traffic to the article, including myself. - BRAINULATOR9 ( TALK) 13:36, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Speedy keep - Google considers him worth a Doodle. That's plenty notable in my book. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao ^{Che dicono a Signa?} _{Lo dicono a Signa.} 13:38, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Delete. ( Inflammatory and irrelevant; removed. Uncle G ( talk) 16:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)) — 2600:1700:C3D1:28A0:14BB:4BE3:5B01:E431 ( talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 13:48, 15 August 2019 (UTC). reply
• Keep - I see room for opportunity and improvement, so I hope we can fix this page if more sources can be found. In addition, we can also take info from the other languages, then translate and put it on this page. (Reply to inflammatory remarks; removed. Uncle G ( talk) 16:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC)) Davidng913 ( talk) 13:58, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Redirect to Nachos per WP:BIO1E. I have yet to find any RS discussing anything more about him than the nacho invention which is notable but best discussed in the context of the article on the food. Compare Cobb salad and Robert Cobb. 24.151.50.175 ( talk) 15:04, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep I see nothing objectionable, the article provides information and is cited, and, as noted in other comments, its being the subject of a Google doodle is likely to improve the article's depth. Frannymae64 ( talk) 15:10, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep Nothing objectionable. And it seems kind of wrong to pull it, what with a Google Doodle citing it as a source." Mfidelman ( talk) 15:25, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep - an and obvious one at that. Plenty of sources to satisfy GNG and needs to be expanded, not deleted or redirected. ♟♙ ( talk) 16:52, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Undecided - but Google's actions by themselves should not dictate a decision on this issue. Javaerb ( talk) 17:19, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep - but delete everything else in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.75.217.26 ( talk) 17:27, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep Unless there is something that says other wise, a Google Doodle, pointing to the article would seem to be evidence of notability. JeepdaySock (AKA, Jeepday) 17:55, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Comment - There is nothing which says that having a google doodle is automatic notability. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply

• Comment. Yes, but a huge amount of GNG has been generated from strong RS as a result of him being a Google Doodle per my comments below). That gives him adequate RS to meet WP:GNG alone; the additional books and other historical references, also support his GNG. Britishfinance ( talk) 00:59, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply

• Speedy Keep - The article is in much better shape, with plenty of sourcing. - Falcorian  ^(talk) 20:43, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep - Why in the world would an article with WP:NOTA standards be deleted? This article should NOT be deleted. Tornadosurvivor2011 21:38, 15 August 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tornadosurvivor2011 ( talk • contribs)
• Comment. I have restored the AfD. It should not have been closed by a non-administrator given the circumstances. Because of the amount of disruption by IPs, I have semi-protected the AfD for one week.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 23:50, 15 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• merge/redirect to the nacho article. This fails the BLP1E easily as he is not notable for anything else, but the supposed invention, and it's not even verified that he is the one who invented the nacho in the first place. Valeince ( talk) 00:15, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply

• Comment. WP:BIO1E does not exclude a subject from being a BLP; it sets the conditions under which a BIO1E can be a BLP, and in this case that On the other hand, if an event is of sufficient importance, even relatively minor participants may require their own articles. Inventing nachos is significant (as noted by Google). Britishfinance ( talk) 01:02, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep. There is clearly a lot of GNG from strong WP:RS re this subject, not just from his being the subject of a Google Doodle ( The Independent [1], USA Today [2], Fortune (magazine) [3], Time (magazine) [4]; there are lots more), but even before that, he has been given a section in several notable books on food as the creator of the nachos (I added a reference from the Oxford Companion to American Food and Drink (he gets two pages), and another notable book on US food by a notable author, Josh Chetwynd; again, I could have added several more books), and other RS, such as Huffington Post from 2012 [5], that pre-date his appearing on Google Doodle. WP:BIO1E does not exclude a subject from being a BLP; it sets the conditions under which a BIO1E can be a BLP, and says: On the other hand, if an event is of sufficient importance, even relatively minor participants may require their own articles. Inventing Nachos is notable (even Google recognise it), and he is the recognised inventor. Britishfinance ( talk) 00:56, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Merge to Nachos and redirect - Classic BLP1E, totally non-notable. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 03:12, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Speedy Keep. He is notable as the inventor of a very famous dish *and also* as the subject of considerable international media attention. As noted by several above, article does not fail notability by WP:BIO1E. I know we should assume the best about editor intentions, but the timing of the deletion request--exactly when he is growing in media notability--seems intentionally malicious, calculated to make visitors question his notability with a conspicuous deletion request precisely when the Google doodle is driving more traffic to the article. Let's put this completely unnecessary deletion attempt to rest.-- Wikibojopayne ( talk) 03:32, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Thsmi002 ( talk) 11:29, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply

• Keep for reasons well-argued by Britishfinance. Moreover, the article has well-sourced biographical information about Anaya that would fit poorly in an article about nachos themselves, so merging would be contra-indicated. XOR'easter ( talk) 14:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep - per improvements after nom. Per Wp:GNG. Per sourcing. BabbaQ ( talk) 16:29, 16 August 2019 (UTC) reply
• Keep - In Texas we say, Ignacio is nacho typical restaurateur. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 03:10, 17 August 2019 (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.