Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Death of Tito Traversa


 * 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) — Sam Sailor 03:15, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Death of Tito Traversa

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article was originally nominated because it was a BIO article that wasn't BIO. The article was created during the initial furor and news coverage, but in hindsight, it doesn't appear to have had any lasting effects, and thus doesn't meet WP:EVENT. MSJapan (talk) 00:19, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep A simple Google search shows that this incident, shocking to rock climbers, received coverage in the most reputable climbing magazines worldwide, that the coverage was sustained, and that there have been newspaper articles about the legal charges against those allegedly responsible even three years after his death, such as this. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  03:35, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep per Cullen238; further recent sources include an article in La Stampa and several citing it (DPM, Gripped). His case has also been cited in the past year in an opinion piece and safety guidelines, further showing its impact on the climbing world. FourViolas (talk) 03:58, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:45, 16 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Leaning Keep on the grounds that the legal proceedings have had ongoing coverage, and it has been 3 years now.   However, I think that I could see a rationale for redirecting if an appropriate target can be found. E.M.Gregory (talk) 21:44, 16 August 2016 (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.