Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony D'Amato


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Star  Mississippi  01:35, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Anthony D'Amato

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Despite having 24 references, the subject doesn't satisfy notability. It's WP:REFBOMB, with every single mention and review they could find. Also possible COI/vanity page. Nswix (talk) 23:56, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Nswix (talk) 23:56, 24 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Jersey-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 01:55, 25 April 2023 (UTC)


 * The NYT, Billboard and NPR articles all seem to satisfy 'In-depth coverage', am I missing something? Jeff UK 20:09, 26 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep as has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources such as AllMusic staff written bio here where there is also a staff album review, The New York Times here, NPR here, there is a dedicated article in the WSJ but its paywalled here, Billboard here and Rolling Stone here. In my view there is enough significant coverage in reliable sources to pass WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:49, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep per above, passes WP:THREE and thats all it needs, NYT, NPR, RS.  // Timothy :: talk  10:23, 30 April 2023 (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.