Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Italian religious minority politicians


 * 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, with the proviso that unreferenced entries should be removed. --bainer (talk) 11:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

List of Italian religious minority politicians

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I was going to speedy this as a WP:BLP concern but thought it nicer to bring it here. The article is totally unsourced and claims religious views on numerous Italian politicians, most of whom don't even have their own article, the notability of people in this list is then also called into question. violet/riga (t) 12:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Nominator: Delete. violet/riga (t) 12:47, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Checco has done some good work adding references to the article and this has alleviated some of the concerns. I would however ask that those people without references be removed until a time that a source can be provided.  violet/riga (t) 09:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is most of them are historical figures and, although there is no doubt about their affiliation, I can't find a source in the internet and I haven't time to go in a library and do some reasearch. --Checco 18:38, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. All the politicians in this list are or were leading politicians: most of them are or were MPs, members of government, regional presidents or MPs and so on. I can put some references. Anyway, I can only say that such a list, not only because I worked hard on it, is very useful and iteresting, as most lists are. Moreover, it is very interesting to know the religious affiliation of politicians, especially when some religious communities are very tied with politics, as it is in Italy. --Checco 13:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - "Useful" and "interesting" are not good reasons to create or keep an article (I would find it very useful to have a page with the telephone numbers of takeaway reastaurants in my neighbourhood, indeed). A list like this would need at least a reference for each person mentioned (plus a section devoted to freethinkers and the like), and in any case it would be very delicate (and quite unencyclopedic), to say the least. Finally, being restricted to religious "minority", the article misses the religious community most "tied with politics" in Italy, that being the (understandable) concern of the article's creator. --Goochelaar 14:54, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that the article is useful as all list of religious politicians or people are. I will put all the references if this is what is needed. --Checco 14:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - for WP:NOT alone. Jauerback 15:39, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Week Keep - I've looked over this again, and maybe I was wrong with my initial assessment. I guess WP:USEFUL works both ways.  Just because I don't think it's useful, doesn't mean it's not necessarily encyclopedic. Jauerback 03:24, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep if references, I think it is encyclopedic -- religious affiliations of politicians is clearly relevant in my book. — Nightstallion 16:17, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It may very well be relevant, but I believe it should be in the politician's article itself rather than here. violet/riga (t) 16:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm working on the references. --Checco 17:18, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The work might take some time, so please wait. --Checco 17:33, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per Nightstallion; as for the WP:N issue, I can confirm that many of those who have red links are certainly notable. It must be understood that Italian articles suffer from a serious (and possibly unexpected) problem of systemic bias.--Aldux 19:31, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I inserted many references, so that the argument about lack of refences does not apply anymore to the article. I hope that my work won't be washed away. Thank you all. --Checco 19:34, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - This seems to me a notable list. Minority-religion politicians in a religiously non-diverse society form a notable and well-defined subject-matter. The danger as I see it is not non-notability but original research. The article would be much stronger with references to secondary sources on the general phenomenon, as opposed to just information about each individual politician's religious affiliation. Llajwa 22:44, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Note that one of the sources (the most used for Protestants) links to a list of books of parliamentary speeches. Among these there is a book about Protestants in the Italian Parliament:
 * 8. Evangelici in Parlamento (1850-1982)
 * Discorsi parlamentari di Giuseppe Malan, Giovanni Morelli, Bonaventura Mazzarella, Giorgio Sonnino, Sidney Sonnino, Giulio Peyrot, Enrico Soulier, Matteo Gay, Dante Argentieri, Giuseppe Bogoni e Tullio Vinay. Introduzione di D. Maselli; a cura di G. Long, 1999, pp. LXII-578, Euro 33,57 (DP02500)
 * --Checco 23:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I was somewhat skeptical but there does seem to be some realiable sources for this. DGG (talk) 01:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Given the country, the list is useful.(And somebody needs to start writing articles about Italian politicians in English.) jonathon 03:50, 28 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment I do not understand remarks like "some religious communities are very tied with politics", "religious affiliations of politicians is clearly relevant", "Given the country, the list is useful" and the like. Given that these are given as arguments relevant to the keeping of this article, they should either be obvious to everybody, or sourced. Is there something I ignore about the relevance of being a waldensian or a jew to Italian politics? --Goochelaar 10:49, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Whilst everybody claims to ignore The Holy See, the masses do affect how that power is played out.jonathon 00:51, 31 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. This is just an obscure list, with contextual value add.  I see no reason not to use categories.   Bur nt sau ce  16:32, 30 October 2007 (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.