Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Valentina Nappi

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. WP:SNOW. Take it as a learning experience--now there should be no question that non-English sources count towards notability. postdlf (talk) 21:38, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Valentina Nappi

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

Non-notable; fails WP:Pornbio with no award wins. Раціональне анархіст (talk) 04:26, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious Keep, significant coverage in major Italian newspapers and magazines, of which the sources cited in the article are just a little extempt. Раціональне анархіст, even assuming for some obscure reasons you didn't considered Corriere del Mezzogiorno, Il Giornale, Secolo d'Italia, Vice, Corriere della Sera, GQ and so on reliable, why don't make a little WP:BEFORE? Eg, these articles are from just the last month: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. There are literally HUNDREDS of articles about her which are easily available. Cavarrone 05:56, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as notable to Italy through mainstream Italian sources is fine for en.Wikiedia. Schmidt, ^{Michael Q.} 05:58, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I don't read Italian. She fails Pornbio. No English RS in the article establishing GN. *shrug* --Раціональне анархіст (talk) 06:17, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I know you are new here (right?), but that is not how notability works. It's not English-centric. Nymf (talk) 07:47, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as passes GNG which as far as I know overrides PORNBIO, Also as a friendly tip - Any cite of any language can be used here and just because you or I can't read italian doesn't mean it's a quicker way of it getting deleted. –Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 06:57, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:49, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:54, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:54, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As evidenced above, nominator doesn't understand how Wikipedia works. This isn't a close call, GNG is easily satisfied. Townlake (talk) 13:53, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep More than enough mainstream media coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. GNG also states "Sources do not have to be available online or written in English." Раціональне анархіст insists he isn't a Redban WP:Sock puppet, but he has just added one more thing to his list of similarities with Redban, these comments. Believing that foreign language sources aren't acceptable is not a common misconception among editors, so this is a very big coincidence. Rebecca1990 (talk) 15:44, 4 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Nominator has not made an argument for deletion. Linking to a policy is not enough, you need to explain why it does not meet the policy. Since you have nominated so many articles with the same lack of rational I am not going to do your homework for you. Chillum 17:42, 4 January 2015 (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.