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 delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:07, 5 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Siete Viejo (gang)[edit]

Siete Viejo (gang) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

When I came to this page from a request for page protection, it had been nominated for speedy as "an article about a living person that is entirely negative in tone and unsourced, where there is no neutral version in the history to revert to." That is not exactly an accurate description of the article. However, as I investigated it I began to believe this is a hoax. The article was created in 2011. this version, soon after creation, lists two sources. The one from NarcoSphere is a dead link. The one from Dallas Morning News is still accessible, but does not mention a gang by the name of Siete Viejo. With this edit in 2012 MauricioMoniko22 removed the reference list and expanded the article, citing no sources. This is the only article MauricioMoniko22 has ever edited. Since then there's been a substantial amount of IP editing, much of which appears to be vandalism. My original inclination was to revert back to the version before MauricioMoniko22's 2012 edit, as sources were listed, but since the sources don't actually appear to verify the content I did some searching and outside of Wikipedia and its mirrors, I can find no indication this gang exists. I've left the article courtesy blanked, and I'll semi-protect it to prevent vandalism over the course of the AFD. I want other editors to help confirm my suspicions that this is a hoax. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 15:52, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• delete as either an unsourced negative blp(G10), assuming they are real people, or as a hoax/vandalism(G3), assuming they are not, or as no assertion of significance(A7) assuming they are real and that was not a wholly unsourced negative blp. Not sure why it did not go as G10, but it's been here a while, so a few more days won't matter-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 16:16, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming none of the above are true, then delete as just not notable.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 16:18, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dlohcierekim I did not delete it as G10 because it was not wholly unsourced - back in 2011 and 2012 there were 2 sources cited. Also, it's not strictly a BLP, although it doesn't have to be to bring up BLP concerns. Now, when I tried to verify information in the article using the sources, it failed verification; but G10 was still inappropriate IMO. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 16:22, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:22, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep for now. How can we make a decision if the article is blanked. That is an oxymoron.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:27, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

BabbaQ There's a button up top called "view history" which will let you see the article, including past versions. My deletion rational also includes links to relevant past versions. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 19:32, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:29, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. Shouldn't have been blanked (nowhere close to meeting WP:CBLANK). I don't know if it is a hoax. However, there are no sources (well - the blanked version has two links - that don't mention the name of this supposed organization, the article at creation cited sources don't seem to mention this supposed organization either) - so it fails WP:V. In my BEFORE for more sources - I was not really able to find any reliable non-wiki clone with info on this gang on-line (It does seem that Siete Viejo is a neighborhood, perhaps a ghetto of sorts, in Laredo, Texas). We typically require national level coverage for WP:NCRIME - so even if this exists, it doesn't come close to the required level of coverage for notability.Icewhiz (talk) 06:24, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• @BabbaQ: You can look at the past versions in the page history-- they are all still there-- and should in case there is a salvageable version that has been missed. I will unblank the thing though as that was blanked automatically by Twinkle.. "Keep for now" is an oxymoron. Either the page meets inclusion criteria or it does not, and determining that is not affected by any one revision.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 13:59, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• delete My searches on "Siete Viejo" + gang not finding sources. I cannot find any indication that it is a notable gang.E.M.Gregory (talk) 17:12, 4 September 2018 (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.