Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phillip P. DiLucente


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. A list of his clients is not important, Wikipedia asks to see significant coverage of the article subject himself to determine that he is notable enough for a stand-alone article. If he has participated high-profile cases, he can be mentioned in those articles. Liz Read! Talk! 01:43, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Phillip P. DiLucente

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

WP:NOTPROMO: WP:BEFORE suggests subject does not meet WP:BIO/WP:GNG &mdash;siro&chi;o 01:54, 17 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:BIO. The only sources that I found mentioning him are just stating he's the defense attorney. No WP:SIGCOV.  APK  whisper in my ear  05:01, 17 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Law. Shellwood (talk) 07:05, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Keep. I believe the article should not be deleted, and that Phillip P. DiLucente meets WP:BIO/WP:GNG criteria. While it's true some sources only mention him as the defense attorney, several others offer significant coverage. He has represented high-profile clients in notable cases. He has also received an award voted by the readers of a local paper, indicating notability beyond his role as an attorney. I have revised the article to remove any potential promotional language and provided a more neutral tone. I suggest that the article be improved rather than deleted. Cbloise242 (talk) 10:51, 17 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm getting "404 - Page Not Found" for the Post Gazette links. But the titles suggest it's not specifically about DiLucente. Please read WP:SIGCOV.  APK  whisper in my ear  10:55, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I see, okay, allow me to address those issues. Thanks for your attention Cbloise242 (talk) 13:14, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, to the best of my knowledge I have addressed those issues. Please let me know if I am mistaken. Thank you for your time. Cbloise242 (talk) 13:23, 17 July 2023 (UTC)


 * Delete This is just straight up promotional, and the sourcing doesn't pass GNG either. All of the articles appear to be about cases he's been in just looking at the headlines, and not about significant coverage of him. If kept, it reads promotionally enough that it should be TNT'd and re-created. SportingFlyer  T · C  13:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The linked articles in this discussion also do not pass GNG. SportingFlyer  T · C  13:54, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Agree with nominator; fails WP:GNG. User:Let'srun 21:51, 18 July 2023 (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.