- 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The result was Speedy keep per WP:SKCRIT#1, nomination withdrawn and no votes for deletion. ( non-admin closure) Cavarrone 08:17, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Vulcano Buono
- Vulcano Buono ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:VMS Mosaic with a rather unhelpful rationale "This is an enormous mall, and no, I'm refuse to ping anyone, period." (despite the fact that I explicitly asked to be pinged back in the PROD). Anyway, with regards to the shopping mall, the company doesn't seem to pass muster. There are some sources, but primarily in Italian, which is not a disqualifier, except I am having trouble judging their reliability - from what I can sell the coverage seems passing and mostly local ( WP:AUDIENCE). In English I found two brief articles about the building itself ( [1], [2]) but they are short and seem more or less on the blog level. This project is tagged on talk page for WP:ITALY, so hopefully some Italian-speaking Wikipedians will contribute with discussion of Italian sources, because the English one don't seem sufficient. Bottom line, being a "cool building" (or a big shopping mall) is not enough to be in the encyclopedia, we need proof that the building/company have in-depth coverage in reliable sources - and I am having trouble seeing that here. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:03, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:06, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:06, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:06, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:06, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep, as pointed in this article in Il Sole 24 Ore Vulcano Buono is not just "a big shopping mall" but the biggest mall existing in Italy, with over 450,000 square metres, 8,000 parking spaces and over 9 million visitors at year, which are astonishing numbers (at least in Italy). Other examples of coverage include articles from La Repubblica [3], Corriere del Mezzogiorno [4], La Repubblica again [5]. Plus several hundreds of book sources [6]. Yes, they are in Italian, but as the same nominator said this is not a disqualifier. The article needs some work, but it is easily improvable. Cavarrone 15:59, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. A Google book search on the site and architect, "Vulcano Buono" Piano, shows quite a few results [7]. Your prod rationale, as repeated here, goes thusly: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient...". But the deletion policy asks editors to observe a higher standard than an article's current sourcing: Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Reasons_for_deletion, item no. 7: "Articles for which thorough [emphasis added] attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed". Checking book results is part of a thorough attempt, and if you feel you can't trust those books' reliability due to not knowing the language, there are a lot of Italian speakers around - see Category:User_it-4 - you could have asked them first as part of your thorough attempt. Please consider withdrawing this nomination. Thanks to User:Cavarrone for expanding it. Novickas ( talk) 14:38, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
- Withdrawing nom. Thank you to User:Cavarrone for expansions and valid arguments that saved this article. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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 Speedy keep per WP:SKCRIT#1, nomination withdrawn and no votes for deletion. ( non-admin closure) Cavarrone 08:17, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Vulcano Buono
- Vulcano Buono ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I prodded it with the following rationale: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline and the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. " It was deprodded by User:VMS Mosaic with a rather unhelpful rationale "This is an enormous mall, and no, I'm refuse to ping anyone, period." (despite the fact that I explicitly asked to be pinged back in the PROD). Anyway, with regards to the shopping mall, the company doesn't seem to pass muster. There are some sources, but primarily in Italian, which is not a disqualifier, except I am having trouble judging their reliability - from what I can sell the coverage seems passing and mostly local ( WP:AUDIENCE). In English I found two brief articles about the building itself ( [1], [2]) but they are short and seem more or less on the blog level. This project is tagged on talk page for WP:ITALY, so hopefully some Italian-speaking Wikipedians will contribute with discussion of Italian sources, because the English one don't seem sufficient. Bottom line, being a "cool building" (or a big shopping mall) is not enough to be in the encyclopedia, we need proof that the building/company have in-depth coverage in reliable sources - and I am having trouble seeing that here. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 12:03, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:06, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Shopping malls-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:06, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:06, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 15:06, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep, as pointed in this article in Il Sole 24 Ore Vulcano Buono is not just "a big shopping mall" but the biggest mall existing in Italy, with over 450,000 square metres, 8,000 parking spaces and over 9 million visitors at year, which are astonishing numbers (at least in Italy). Other examples of coverage include articles from La Repubblica [3], Corriere del Mezzogiorno [4], La Repubblica again [5]. Plus several hundreds of book sources [6]. Yes, they are in Italian, but as the same nominator said this is not a disqualifier. The article needs some work, but it is easily improvable. Cavarrone 15:59, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
- Keep. A Google book search on the site and architect, "Vulcano Buono" Piano, shows quite a few results [7]. Your prod rationale, as repeated here, goes thusly: "The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient...". But the deletion policy asks editors to observe a higher standard than an article's current sourcing: Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Reasons_for_deletion, item no. 7: "Articles for which thorough [emphasis added] attempts to find reliable sources to verify them have failed". Checking book results is part of a thorough attempt, and if you feel you can't trust those books' reliability due to not knowing the language, there are a lot of Italian speakers around - see Category:User_it-4 - you could have asked them first as part of your thorough attempt. Please consider withdrawing this nomination. Thanks to User:Cavarrone for expanding it. Novickas ( talk) 14:38, 24 May 2016 (UTC)
- Withdrawing nom. Thank you to User:Cavarrone for expansions and valid arguments that saved this article. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:01, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
- 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.