Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luca Allam (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. SNOWCLOSE and adding a little salt. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:40, 23 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Luca Allam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

And again declined and rejected at draft, speedy deleted previously, zero independent reliable sources, fails WP:GNG. Theroadislong (talk) 17:12, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media and Advertising. Theroadislong (talk) 17:12, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:36, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - fails WP:GNG due to lack of significant coverage. Doesn't qualify through any other means. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:39, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Was this copied from a Word document? It looks like a CV... This individual is not notable. Sourcing in the article isn't showing notability, I can only find a few PR items in Gnews. Lacks notability. Oaktree b (talk) 20:19, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It was speedy deleted TODAY? Less then 24 hrs later it's back... SALT this. Oaktree b (talk) 20:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Frustratingly told them very clearly that this person was not notable over IRC a few days ago. Declined the AfCs a bunch of times. Salt? qcne (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - Not finding any real proper independent sourcing that could salvage this article, which feels promotional, is written oddly, and doesn't even make an attempt to source the individual facts. WP:SALT is appropriate here since it appears that unless blocked, this will continue to be recreated as the editor either won't or can't listen to what other editors have told them. CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 00:47, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Note that there is currently an advertisement on Freelancer for someone to fix articles related to this subject. [1] CoffeeCrumbs (talk) 05:02, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That is extremely concerning. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:25, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a 'not a ballot' template for this reason. JuniperChill (talk) 11:43, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. To repeat what I said in the previous AfD (yesterday!): none of the sources in the article is independent, and I can't find even a trivial mention of his name in any reliable independent sources. A case of WP:ADMASQ. --bonadea contributions talk 16:23, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Clearly fails WP:GNG. Time to Salt this one. Edwardx (talk) 17:54, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete and salt. Procyon117 (talk) 18:35, 17 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Promotional, CV crap. This should be immediately deleted. There's no need to debate this for a week. There's clearly no significant coverage. Ynsfial (talk) 03:20, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete and Salt It is a pile of scrap. The editor really really needs to go. Its up at coin. scope_creep^Talk 23:14, 18 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (and possibly salt) When a draft has been rejected, it means that a reviewer determined that the subject is definitely not notable and cannot (in most cases) be submitted again. This is different to a decline where although its possible to resubmit, if this were an article at the current stage, it would likely be deleted/draftified. Publishing it to mainspace is the wrong thing to do since it will end up being deleted by AfD/CSD/PROD. If significant new sources come to light, then appealing to the reviewer would be appropriate. Additionally, this article is not written in a usual way, using unusual headers, many links to dab pages, etc (though not a reason for deletion as it can be fixed by editing). JuniperChill (talk) 11:41, 21 November 2024 (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.