Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hieronymus Medices


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 07:40, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Hieronymus Medices

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

The article makes some claim to significance, e.g., that the text is relevant in helping novices understand the writings of St. Thomas Aquinas. Those claims are supported by no evidence, and I don't think there's enough accessible material to make this article work. I have copy-edited it for clarity, and much of it was unintelligible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Actualcpscm (talk • contribs) 19:30, 11 November 2022 (UTC) Relisting comment: Discussion was created improperly and not transcluded to the log until now. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, * Pppery * it has begun... 15:55, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Christianity,  and Italy. Shellwood (talk) 18:38, 13 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Weak delete despite his entry in the CE, there's really nothing else on the guy. I tried his anglicized name as well, came back with nothing. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:56, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment I've found a couple of brief write-ups in Latin:, . They both have similar information: he studied in Lomardy and Bologna, he worked for the Inquisition in Mantua, and he wrote a syllogistic version of the Summa Theologica which was very helpful for students. I'm undecided whether this is sufficient for notability. Sojourner in the earth (talk) 20:43, 13 November 2022 (UTC)
 * With that first link I lean towards this being a bit closer to keep, especially since it confirms a few biographical details I was less keen about taking at face-value from CE. However, it doesn't really muster much new. ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:58, 13 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep The 391-word entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia [1] is evidence of notability and significant coverage. There's also a paywalled entry in the online version of the German Biographisch-Bibliographisches Kirchenlexikon [2]. An older, print version of the Kirchenlexikon is footnoted in the Catholic Encylopedia entry, along with three Latin sources. 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 14:26, 15 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Appears to be a significant minor figure in the history of religious thought. Xxanthippe (talk) 01:41, 16 November 2022 (UTC).
 * Keep. I think the Catholic Encyclopedia article by itself would be enough, but we have several sources besides. Jahaza (talk) 03:34, 17 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep as per the reliable book sources identified in this discussion which show a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 19:55, 18 November 2022 (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.