Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sergio Cotta

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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 23:16, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sergio Cotta[edit]

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

The article is completely unsourced, and does not pass WP:GNG. Additionally there is no proof of satisfying WP:ANYBIO or WP:NACADEMIC. So, I believe the article should be deleted. Kostas20142 (talk) 11:25, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 11:38, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Kostas20142 (talk) 11:42, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Kostas20142 (talk) 11:42, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Kostas20142 (talk) 11:45, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Italian Wikipedia article has a few decent looking references suggesting that the subject passes the GNG; I've added an obituary (in Italian) to this article. Most of his work appears to be in Italian, though there are English translations, and it seems that there was a book published in his honour in 1995, suggesting that he meets at least criteria 1 of WP:ACADEMIC ("The publication of an anniversary or memorial journal volume or a Festschrift dedicated to a particular person is usually enough to satisfy Criterion 1"). Josh Milburn (talk) 18:20, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- notable as WP:AUTHOR with multiple published books and decent library holdings: Identities. Here's a sample review:

Review: Why Violence? A Philosophical Interpretation by Sergio Cotta; Dante Germino; Giovanni Gallace. Review by: James C. Dick. Political Theory, Vol. 14, No. 3 (Aug., 1986), pp. 513-517 Published by: Sage Publications, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/191274 Page Count: 5

Another review (Journal of Social Philosophy): link. K.e.coffman (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Appears to pass WP:ANYBIO ([1]). — O Fortuna^{semper crescis, aut decrescis} 17:18, 29 April 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.