Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonella Roccuzzo

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. I see a consensus among participants to Keep this article on the project. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:44, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Antonella Roccuzzo[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)

No evidence of notability, All GNews results are essentially about her being Lionel Messi's wife[1], Fails NMODEL and GNG –Davey2010^Talk 21:02, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Fashion, Football, Internet, and Argentina. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:52, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:54, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify for now. I think that there is enough coverage about her online and her career to justify a potential article; however, better sources need to be found and the article needs to be improved, not deleted for me. Paul Vaurie (talk) 03:28, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Draftify (the latter if someone volunteers to improve the article). Lacks in-depth coverage to meet WP:NBASIC. MrsSnoozyTurtle 03:50, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No indication of being notable. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 13:16, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Plenty of sources available, see [2][3][4]. If deleted, I strongly believe it should be sent to draft or minimally a redirect to Messi. Belichickoverbrady (talk) 17:44, 20 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They seem to name mentions only in the context of her husband being there. This is WP:BLP and it needs real WP:SECONDARY sourcing. The interview doesn't pass WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 08:00, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Strongest possible keep, the amount of coverage online is outstanding. Clearly passes GNG. Like People, Sportskeeda, AS, Marca, and over 37 millions followrs. Ridiculous nomination IMO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ortizesp (talk • contribs) 22:54, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Christ talk about Wikipedia:Assume bad faith!, WP:INVALIDBIO applies. If we take away Messi we're left with nothing - she's done nothing that warrants an article except for being a notable persons wife. Had she not been married to Messi she wouldn't even have an article..... I still 110% maintain she is not a notable individual and I'm genuinely perplexed that such an article should be kept essentially on the basis of "she's married to a notable person"..... I'm astounded. –Davey2010^Talk 20:22, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think INVALIDBIO holds, Rocuzzo's fame goes beyond Messi now. She does modelling and has side businesses that gets here attention without Messi like this and this. Ortizesp (talk) 18:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Seems to meet WP:GNG, with WP:SIGCOV e.g. in the People and Diario AS articles. WP:INVALIDBIO could be a concern, but we have sufficient coverage of Roccuzzo to justify a stand-alone article. Suriname0 (talk) 18:34, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per sources above which show notability. Giant Snowman 18:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti ^{*Let's talk!*} 10:02, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per above. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 20:13, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm totally peplexed as well since its plainly obvious its allcoming from him. The test here what happens when they get divorved. I've seen this time and time again throughout the last twenty odd years. They get coverage for the divorce, appear for about a year or so as a human-interest story and then after a year of so, they dissapear. That happens all the time. All the fame here is coming from him. She was completly unknown studying to become a dentist before she met him and she would been a dentist if she hadn't met him. It is completly reflected glory and nothing else as far as I can see from the coverage. scope_creep^Talk 21:31, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per sources in the article and here. Unfortunately, it's still common to view women as sidekicks of their husbands, especially if the husband is more famous than them. It shouldn't be that way. If a person is notable this should be respected. Still, it's not an automatic keep. The text needs to be extensive enough for its own entry. For Roccuzzo, both bars are met. gidonb (talk) 01:59, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - if this is kept, it should be moved to the correct spelling Antonela Roccuzzo Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:12, 28 August 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.