Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luca Litrico

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 redirect to Angelo Litrico. (non-admin closure) ^BE _CK ^Y _SA ^{Y L}E _S 03:28, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Luca Litrico

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

Fails our WP:GNG Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, which summarises what independent sources have published about subjects. I can find no in-depth coverage of him anywhere. Theroadislong (talk) 17:10, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note from authorPlease do not delete the article. I worked hard, help me to improve it. Klimgeran (talk) 17:21, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to improve the article. Klimgeran (talk) 17:24, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or Keep, but it is way too early to hold an AfD Subject is just some guy related to Notable man who now works in the company. He didn't really do anything of note. Also the article is 4 days old. The article is clearly under construction. Note to author, keep in mind, if this guy didn't do anything notable, all your hard work will go to waste. I'm just buying you some time. L3X1 My Complaint Desk 18:30, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Angelo Litrico. Clearly promotional, probable undeclared COI. This has already been deleted three times on it.wp as blatant promotion, now the same user is trying it here. The firm is indubitably notable, and it may be that we should have a page on that rather than on the founder; this person is one of the managers (perhaps owners too) of a notable firm, so gets some mentions. But he's not notable in his own right. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:02, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: COI declared here. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:04, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
At least it's not paid editing. J 947 20:54, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy and Redirect to Angelo Litrico or, as Justlettersandnumbers has said above, to the firm. - He might become notable later; this might be another potentially valuable user to lose because of strictness in AfDs. J 947 19:22, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment to author: Klimgeran, if the end result is 'Redirect' (which it probably will be), if you go through old versions of the page you can still see your work. J 947 19:22, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Angelo Litrico (to the firm if an article is created on it). Userfying the current content is fine. This appears to be a case of WP:NOTINHERITED. We're not seeing, or finding, independent, reliable sources showing the notability of this person. Speaking only for myself, it's difficult to find sources when the most likely sources will be in Italian, but it's telling that the Italian Wikipedia has deleted this article three times. Note that it appears that Luca Litrico is no longer associated with his uncle's firm. According to Angelo Litrico and http://www.world-fashion.info/firm/5016-Luca-Litrico Luca left the firm in 2012 to form his own brand. I don't see any problem with having this article at AFD. We have a COI editor who created a very questionable article, and who seems to have some CIR issues with English Wikipedia, but we didn't speedy the article. We brought it to AFD after a few days and nothing is going to happen for a while. In the meantime editors are looking at the article and discussing things with the creator. This is at the user's page, other users' pages, the teahouse, and the article's talk page. If the subject is notable we should be able to find the sources and article will survive, and if not, well, we don't keep articles about non-notable subjects for fear of losing a COI editor's possible future contributions. Meters (talk) 20:35, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:50, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:50, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

thanks....i understand. Klimgeran (talk) 21:00, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I thought free. This is my first project on Wikipedia. Klimgeran (talk) 21:16, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect as per the suggestion above is my vote.TH1980 (talk) 22:43, 5 February 2017 (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.