Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Li cinque libri della chitarra alla spagnola


 * 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 merge to Giovanni Paolo Foscarini. (non-admin closure) buidhe 00:21, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Li cinque libri della chitarra alla spagnola

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Only one source (a listing of it in Appalachian State University library) and one sentence, plus fails WP:GNG - Poydoo is good at talking and editing 00:48, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Poydoo is good at talking and editing 00:48, 7 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep. WP:NBOOK says "The vast majority of books whose Wikipedia articles are nominated for deletion, and whose notability could reasonably be called into question, are contemporary. Nevertheless, the notability of books written or published earlier may occasionally be disputed and the criteria specified above, intended primarily for contemporary books, may be unsuitable because they would be too restrictive and would exclude articles on books that are worthy of notice. Common sense should prevail. In such cases, possible bases for a finding of notability include, in particular, how widely the book has been cited or written about, the number of editions of the book, whether it has been reprinted, the fame that the book enjoys or enjoyed in the past, its place in the history of literature, its value as a historical source and its age.*
 * 1.	This book was published in 1640, and is held in several important library collections.
 * 2.	It is still available to buy after 360 years, in multiple outlets
 * 3.	There is a modern playing edition, demonstrating that it is still relevant and in use
 * 4.	It is referred to, at least in the notes, of a number of scholarly works, 1, 2, 3, 4 and one PhD thesis. Mccapra (talk) 08:31, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep, per all the above, and that it is indexed by major university libraries (and WorldCat) and cited by a variety of modern books on the guitar. Chiswick Chap (talk) 14:02, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, buidhe 04:49, 14 April 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment: I found some discussion of Foscarini's publications in pages 45-6 and plate 31. Foscarini's Primo, secondo e terzo volumes appear important in the evolution of the instrumental notation. However it's not clear whether this edition extended 10 years later had the same importance, and whether the discussion in the article on Foscarini may be all that is needed? AllyD (talk) 15:55, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <b style="color: White">b</b><b style="color: White">uidh</b><b style="color: White">e</b> 15:03, 21 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the author, Giovanni Paolo Foscarini. There is only one sentence of prose in this article, and the article about the author is only three paragraphs long. I'm not questioning notability, but it appears that this book included reprints of most or all of Foscarini's previous books if I understand Giovanni Paolo Foscarini correctly. Hence, coverage of this book would be best suited for the article about the author, at least for now. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:19, 21 April 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.