Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lambert of Cremona


 * 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. Lankiveil (speak to me) 13:18, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Lambert of Cremona

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Can't locate any sources about Lambert of Cremona. If one looks up his name there is a result in the book The New Global Law (2010) but looking up the quoted Latin text in the "71" note reveals that the work perhaps belongs to Liutprand of Cremona, so it could be a book error. Probably the earliest mentions of a bishop named Lambert of Cremona in Wikipedia is from this November 2005 edit in the English Wikipedia, and this October 2004 edit in the Italian Wikipedia, The former edit might be a translation of the Italian article. There is no article of this person in the Italian Wikipedia. I'm not suspecting this article as a hoax, as there could be at least one source out there. TheGGoose (talk) 15:38, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 15:47, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 15:47, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 15:47, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 15:48, 6 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. The article's creator, User:Johnpacklambert, is a frequent contributor at AfD and may be able to clear this up. I would imagine there's sources somewhere that establish the subject's notability, but I couldn't find anything with my cursory search.  North of Eden (talk) 16:20, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. This may be an error from the article's original source. As noted, the reference in The New Global Law almost certainly was intended to mean Liutprand of Cremona. A reference to "Ubaldo," the other bishop mentioned in the November 2005 edit to Cremona mentioned above, appears on page 60 of Power, Politics and Episcopal Authority: The Bishops of Cremona and Lincoln by Angelo Silvestri, in which Ubaldo is described as receiving a grant of land from Henry III. This reference cites Leoni's Il codice diplomatico della cattedrale di Cremona, which may be useful in untangling this case. Lambert, however, does not appear in the Silvestri book. Other sources, including Christopher Kleinhenz's Medieval Italy: An Encyclopedia and even Arthur Kingsley Porter's 1917 Lombard Architecture, mention Ubaldo but never Lambert. Unless better sourcing appears, recommendation would probably be to Redirect to Liutprand of Cremona since Liutprand has been rendered as/confused with Lambert in at least one scholarly source. Calamondin12 (talk) 17:09, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Liutprand of Cremona per Calamondin12's research and findings. I am fairly confident that this "Lambert" isn't a historical figure in and of himself, and the mistaken-identity suggestion posed by Calamondin12 makes a lot of sense.  North of Eden (talk) 19:04, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. A few more sources, in Italian, might provide a little more background on the subject. The 19th-century book Repertorio diplomatico cremonense makes reference to one Lamberto, an "abbot," and discusses public dissatisfaction with the bishop Ubaldo around this time. A document dated 1052 from the University of Pavia refers to Lamberto, "archpriest of Genivolta" (who may or may not be the same person), in connection with Ubaldo as a potential recipient of property in a legal matter. An 1832 book, Annali d'Italia compiled by Lodovico Antonio Muratori, mentions an abbot of San Lorenzo near Cremona named Lamberto who appears to have been involved in a dispute with another bishop over property during Henry III's time. But it is unclear whether these refer to one or multiple individuals. In addition, several quite exhaustive sources, which mention numerous Lambertos in the index, do not include an index entry for any Lamberto as bishop (vescovo) of Cremona or for anyone with the specific name Lambert of Cremona (Lamberto di Cremona). Calamondin12 (talk) 02:18, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * In that event, we may have a notability problem. I'm generally pretty inclusionistic about historical figures, especially of the Dark Ages variety, but given the difficulty in tracking down definite mentions, it's hard to say this guy has significant coverage in reliable sources.  North of Eden (talk) 05:16, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete clear evidence of notability is lacking. I think what we need at this point is the creation of a list of all the bishops of Cremona, in the article on the diocese to begin with.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:34, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete -- It is a poor stub without sources. If he was bishop, it can be re-created, but as JPL says, what we need is a list of bishops: we have such for all English dioceses and articles on most of the bishops.  This needs to be repeated for the rest of Europe.  I note there is no linked article in the Italian WP, which might be a source for an article.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:40, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:V, there is a list of bishops of Cremona in the German Wikipedia, and there's no Lamberto. Kraxler (talk) 17:29, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. This looks like fairly good evidence that the bishop "Lambert of Cremona" is basically a mistake that's made it into one or more scholarly sources, with elements from Liutprand of Cremona, the 11th-century bishop Ubaldo, and several Lambertos who held church offices during Ubaldo's time but don't appear to meet WP:N. Calamondin12 (talk) 18:14, 12 August 2015 (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.