Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonio Vitali

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 no consensus. No arguments for deletion aside from the nominator but not enough participation to determine consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:40, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Antonio Vitali[edit]

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

Was tagged as a speedy. I am undecided and am listing here procedurally. This article appears reasonably well written, and while notability is doubtful, this isn't a BLP and so somewhat more inclusive standards should IMO apply. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 17:29, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:31, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:02, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There are some additional standards for the nature of the sourcing that apply to BLPs, but the same notability standards apply to BLP as all articles. This one sounds likely, but either someone must describe the nature of the source being relied on, or some additional sources must be found DGG ( talk ) 01:19, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - there are many possible sources online. Bearian (talk) 21:01, 11 May 2010 (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.