Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlo Bazzi

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. Minimal debate even after two relists, so calling this a soft delete. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:30, 25 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Carlo Bazzi[edit]

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

Apparently non-notable glass manufacturer, does not meet GNG or any other criterion. Note: the article previously contained more material, some of it unsourced, some of it entirely spurious, which I have removed. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:58, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is the first time I discuss in such pages, so I apologize for any mistake I will commit; in it.wiki italian painters notability is my main occupation, so I hope I can help. The article is totally wrong, not only because there's no content and only bibliography, but also because the bibliography itself it's wrong:

Carlo Pirovano, La Pittura in Italia: Il Novecento, Vol. 2;
Raffaele De Grada, Il Novocento a Palazzo Isimbardi;
Paola Slavich, Ospedale maggiore/Cà granda: Ritratti moderni

Noone of these three books really talks about Carlo Bazzi (except for three insignificant quotes as "friend of", "pupil of"), so it's very misleading to consider them "further readings".

I was trying to know if it was possible to write this article in it.wiki, but the only notable thing I found on my books is that six Bazzi's paintings are owned by Banca Commerciale Italiana, which owns a good collection of art (source: this book, p. 193). I don't know how notable you can consider this thing here in en.wiki, but Carlo Bazzi in it.wiki probably would be considered very borderline. Carlomartini86^{(Knock-Knock)} 17:09, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 19:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 19:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. -- 1Wiki8Q5G7FviTHBac3dx8HhdNYwDVstR (talk) 19:18, 3 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:57, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:54, 10 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 ^Talk 15:19, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It looks like this individual only picked up a small amount of notability with his work, and I feel like in the spirit of the rules (beyond just the mere words) this should probably be deleted. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 10:04, 25 September 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.