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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:36, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pierfrancesco Cravel[edit]

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

This page was deleted nine times in its italian version.

Please check why this italian version page was deleted.

After deletion, an english version was uploaded.

In my opinion, this is definitely an ad page. Wildsetup (talk) 22:53, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: this is not my AFD, I'm good-faith submitting it for the non-autoconfirmed user who wanted it. tedder (talk) 15:03, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Plenty of online sources to back up the contents of the article and to establish notability. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 16:04, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: While I can see that the equivalent article has been deleted 9 times in the Italian Wikipedia, this looks like a repeated recreation of a promotional article, which would suggest a very different situation over there than we have here. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 16:08, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:50, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:03, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:09, 25 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As I read it (my Italian consists of interpolating between French and Latin), the page was deleted for being promotional and non-encyclopedic, and re-created multiple times without valid argument why the result should change. Seems to be trying to get away with it here. I'd be tempted to salt this the first time round, given the history in Italian. Given that the user who created the page was "Pierfrancesco", we probably have CoI problems, too. I actually see 9 News hits on his name, so his work does get mentioned a bit, although probably not to the level of notability. David V Houston (talk) 01:22, 25 May 2010 (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.