Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roberto Ferrante (2nd nomination)

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. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 13:05, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Roberto Ferrante

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

Subject does not meet notability and written as a press release Canyouhearmenow 13:00, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2014 June 30. —cyberbot I ^Notify_Online 13:22, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:55, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:55, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:55, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:55, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Blatantly promotional as well as badly written. Deb (talk) 14:28, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep if we can find sources that establish him as the Planet Records founder and successful record producer (an assertion of notability) better than the ones in the article right now (preferably in English). Our article on the label has a few maintenance tags on it, yes, but we've had it for several years now and the creator of the article under discussion, while he has edited the label article, did not create or significantly expand it. "Blatantly promotional and badly written" is not by itself a reason to delete if the subject is nonetheless notable. Daniel Case (talk) 14:39, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I could agree with that argument if substantial sources could be found. But in my research I found only information that leads back to pages created by the subject such as Linkedin, Facebook etc. Third party sources are lacking for this subject and I am afraid he simply does not fall into the guidelines for notability. Let us also not forget that this article was deleted once before due to the same arguments.[1]--Canyouhearmenow 14:47, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Finding these sources was trivial: Billboard, Billboard, Corriere del Mezzogiorno. It would need copyediting for tone and trimming to verifiable facts, but he may be notable. --Michig (talk) 16:37, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The notability of the subject does not inherit notability from a company that he founded. There are no independent sources that I could find that establish that the subject himself is notable. We require reliable sources about the subject to pass WP:BIO. Note that the article creator has also tried to introduce similar articles onto itwiki (it:Discussioni_utente:Dottorgrasso1988) and is now blocked.- Mr X 16:56, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - More or less the exact same problem as last time it was deleted: sufficient coverage of the record label, but very little about him (except when talking about the label). --— Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:37, 30 June 2014 (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.