Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ilaria Venturini Fendi

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Rollidan (talk) 00:55, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ilaria Venturini Fendi

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

No RS, most of them are interviews, fails WP:GNG. Meeanaya (talk) 05:23, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Meeanaya (talk) 05:23, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:28, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

More reliable sources (books) have been added to references and bibliography, thanks for checking --Laviniastampa (talk) 08:08, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - why would interviews not be valid for establishing notability? She also has non-interview sources covering her, anyway, such as [1][2] and she has enough mention in GBooks hits for me to think she's an easy pass. — Amakuru (talk) 21:20, 10 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Interviews are usually seen as invalid for establishing notability because most of the time the only substantive content comes directly from the subject of the interview without any fact-checking. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:31, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - There are plenty of Italian language sources such as this, this, this and this to demonstrate that she meets WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:54, 12 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:46, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Amakuru, as well as an additional search to confirm that the findings are true, and that this article does indeed met WP:GNG. Utopes (talk) 19:40, 17 July 2019 (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.