Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giordano Berti

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. czar 18:42, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Giordano Berti[edit]

[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)

Subject of a notability disclaimer since 2014, still apparently failing it at least on en.wiki. That he himself created and expanded his own article with several accounts (some of which, like User:Rodrigotebani, were blocked for sockpuppetry) should appear highly plausible to anyone able to do anagrams. Lone-078 (talk) 16:15, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Authors, and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 16:37, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I would consider this a keep under NAUTH but I do not find any RS with book reviews. Much of what is in this article is either un-sourced or the sources listed do not support the information in the article. As an example, the section on memberships and awards is a bunch of essentially hobbyist groups around Tarot and one group dedicated to aficionados of truffles. The references link to the organizations, not third-party sources. I had some hope for the Graf Institute in Bologna but I can't tell if it really involves anyone but him - he's the only person listed on the web site. (The address takes you to what looks like a residential building, but I can't tell if that's the case.) There is no question that he has written many books on Tarot and some on the occult, but not such that would support NPROF. Lamona (talk) 04:47, 8 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no evidence in the article of potential relevance. Being invited to a single conference does not pass GNG or NPROF. Also see the other problems found by Lamona. --hroest 03:17, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete - he might be notable, but there's so much mess covering up the actual sources. Bearian (talk) 18:30, 11 January 2023 (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.