Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fabio Chizzola


 * 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 delete.  Sandstein  19:14, 28 August 2018 (UTC)

Fabio Chizzola

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not demonstrate notability. Magazines and other clients are par for the course for a fashion photographer. Of 3 sources, one is the subject's own site; The New York Times source is a lifestyle piece about their farm; and the third is a non-reliable source (The Fashion Spot, and its forum at that). Lopifalko (talk) 17:34, 20 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Photography-related deletion discussions. Lopifalko (talk) 17:39, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. Lopifalko (talk) 17:39, 20 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment: The "lifestyle piece about their farm" has (source) and does contain information about his life that is more detailled than the deletion nomination text might make it sound like. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:48, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I had previously only skimmed the NYT article. I've just skimmed it more thoroughly, reading the first few words of each paragraph, and by that measure every paragraph is about the farm and not about his photography. -Lopifalko (talk) 20:03, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
 * There is a bit about photography, even if it's the photography of a previous occupant and how Chizzola regards this. But Chizzola is here as a photographer, not as a resident of an old house, or as the custodian of somebody else's photographs. User:ToBeFree, can you find anything significant about his photography? (Or enough about his residence/custodianship to show notability there?) -- Hoary (talk) 00:48, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
 * (raises imaginary glasses, rubs eyes) You're correct, this is about someone else's photographs. I have now also taken more time to look for other sources. This one might be worth consideration, but not even this is addressing the person per WP:GNG. Its independence is possibly questionable as well; maybe this is a paid article. Their "advertisement" page makes me skeptical. Also, the person does not appear to meet any of the four examples in WP:ARTIST. There is a nice essay about this: No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. In a nutshell, Delete. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:51, 21 August 2018 (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.