Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gianluca D'Agostino


 * 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. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  10:48, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Gianluca D'Agostino

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This subject fails WP:BASIC guidelines for notability. He also fails WP:WRITER, WP:ACADEMIC, and WP:ANYBIO. Note, this article is apparently an WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY, which explains why the article consists mostly of WP:PEACOCK and WP:COAT. I would normally edit the article to comply with BLP guidelines, but in this case, the article would be about one line. The subject's reporting as a journalist and work as a producer are not significantly covered by any reliable sources, and his work is not demonstrably influential (it has not had a significant impact on his field) according to reliable sources. Of course, his reporting, which forms the basis of the article, is about other subjects entirely; it doesn't say anything about the notability of the journalist, nor does it impart much about the journalist biographically. Journalists are supposed to report on notable things. Similarly, his collaborative research is not adequately cited or discussed by others to qualify as a notable academic. The content of this living person's biography is based principally on his own works, however citing to the subject offers no indication as to the actual significance of any particular achievement or publication. This article is a WP:RESUME of non-notable work. JFHJr (㊟) 23:31, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers,  Riley   Huntley  23:36, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers,  Riley   Huntley  23:36, 15 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete Can not independently confirm much more than simple existence of a person, and the SPS sources do not establish actual notability. Collect (talk) 01:32, 16 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete As well, independent searches for sources can not find anything about the subject that would signify notability to Wikipedia standards. Many of the sources in the article are primary and thus unusable. Or they are trivial in-passing mentions not in-depth. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 20:26, 16 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. As already noted, there seem to be insufficient secondary sources to indicate that D'Agostino meets the requirements laid down in Notability (people). AndyTheGrump (talk) 23:33, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete for failing WP:AUTHOR, WP:BK, and for all of the good reasons given above. Qworty (talk) 05:33, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

i am gianluca d'agostino, the person cited in this article, i totally agree with you about rhe fact i am not a notable person because i never cared about the press coverage of my work but if my work is not relevant for wikipedia, why did you published it? Last year i donated to wikipedia the copyright to reproduce the central pages of my book high concept because my book was written to re-define the meaning of the term high concept given the great confusion created around the term high concept. Wikipedia accepted my donation and published it on the italian version of the article high concept movie to make it clear about the different theories on the subject and the confusion created by Justin Wyatt. Now after i donated you the copyright to reproduce my book and you published it you want to delete the author? other than being unfair, the main theory that helps the readers to understand the high concept movie would be orphan. i am not saying you have to report my entire biography because i don't meet Wikipedia third party standards enough but if you published my book central pages which are the hard-core of my theory on high concept I think my name should at least be mentioned because I am the author of the work you published and i donated you my copyright which is something not every author is keen on doing it.Gdagostino (talk) 11:40, 20 November 2012 (UTC) Gdagostino (talk) 11:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC) here's the copyright reference of the text i donated to Wikipedia:http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussione:High_concept_movie

Gdagostino (talk) 11:34, 20 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Firstly, this is the English-language Wikipedia - we have no authority over the Italian Wikipedia, or vice-versa. Secondly, it would seem to me to be most improper to allow decisions regarding article content to be swayed by donations (whether of material or otherwise) though it is unclear from the link you post (I am relying on Google translate) exactly what it is you have donated. AndyTheGrump (talk) 12:43, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Your publication about High concept is not influential as demonstrated by reliable sources; even on the Italian Wikipedia you simply cite to yourself with no third party support. Furthermore, you and seem to be working in tandem to promote yourself at the Italian Wikipedia. Nobody cares whether an article is orphaned. I just hope someone at Italian Wiki notices what you two have done and has a problem with it. Last point: I left you a notice clearly pointing out your conflict of interest. You've nonetheless chosen to participate in this deletion discussion, despite its clear advice not to do so. Good luck. JFHJr (㊟) 13:18, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: Checkuser indicates possible sockpuppetry in connection with single-purpose account . JFHJr (㊟) 22:08, 21 November 2012 (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.