Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bust of Giovanni Vigevano


 * 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. Michig (talk) 09:34, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Bust of Giovanni Vigevano

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unimportant, lack of sources, perhaps merge with Giovanni Vigevano Whenaxis (talk) 22:57, 25 December 2011 (UTC)

Disagree that there is a lack of sources - two sources are included. And as an early work by one of foremost sculptor of art history, it's hardly unimportant. It's much better for the sculpture to have an independent entry, where its image can be shown, rather than being merged, and therefore lost, in the much larger Bernini entry. Xcia0069 (talk) 10:55, 26 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions. Whenaxis (talk) 23:08, 25 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions.  —Whenaxis (talk) 23:08, 25 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per the hundreds of reliable sources found here, taking the subject way over the notability bar. Phil Bridger (talk) 11:32, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment those sources are for the main article here: Gian Lorenzo Bernini, not the article in question here: Bust of Giovanni Vigevano. I realize that Gian Lorenzo Bernini a.k.a. "Giovanni Vigevano" is important, but I'm not sure that a seperate article of the Bust of Giovanni Vigevano is important; WP:MERGE. Whenaxis (talk) 21:36, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Bernini was the artist; Vigevano was the subject. They were not the same person. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:34, 27 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notable sculpture. It seems to me that the nominator hasn't been as thorough in his research as possible before deciding to nominate the article for deletion. Antique Rose &mdash; Drop me a line  23:40, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep the nominator's rationale that there's a lack of sources about the article's subject is not correct. Cavarrone (talk) 09:37, 28 December 2011 (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.