Talk:Luca Pozzi

Issues
There are no good references that show notability. The article is stuffed full of non-encyclopaedic content, including what appears to be a list of every work and every publication by this artist. Needs very severe pruning and some good reputable references from the real world to survive here. Potential nominee for deletion unless much improved.  Velella  Velella Talk 13:08, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. Some more references have been added: can you confirm me that they can be considered as reputable refereces? Most of the sources are art magazines. Thank you Manumanumanuela (talk) 14:00, 22 July 2015 (UTC)


 * I would be happy to review the article prior to any deletion discussion that I might initiate, but only if and when, you feel that all the points noted above have been addressed - the article is still stuffed full of non-encyclopaedic material. Regards  Velella  Velella Talk 14:10, 22 July 2015 (UTC)


 * As the article stands now it is a strong candidate for deletion. Full of non-encyclopaedic material particularly wikipedia is not meant to be a CV.  If you trim out the poorly written descriptions there is little that speaks to notability.Peter Rehse (talk) 20:35, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The whole entry is a copy paste from the main and sub pages of http://www.lucapozzi.com/.Peter Rehse (talk) 16:04, 24 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Since the author seemed to be unwilling or unable to amend this article, I have removed all that extraneous material. I believe that notability is possible to demonstrate (q.v the New Scientist" reference) but much work is still needed.  Velella  Velella Talk 13:06, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because... (I am the author of the uploaded images) --Lucapozzilp (talk) 12:25, 25 July 2015 (UTC)