Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stefano Cicchini


 * 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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:39, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Stefano Cicchini

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

promotional pr piece sourced to black hat seo "fake news" sites, fails notability criteria for "bloggers" and "influencers" Praxidicae (talk) 12:06, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 12:13, 16 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete clearly accepted at AFC in error. We all make those, but the sources here are unusually poor. This is pure Vanispamcruftisement from a declared paid editor and needs to go. Fiddle   Faddle  13:23, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete a non-notable writer. Some days I wonder if I put too much faith in AfC, but then I remember we have articles that have existed for 15 years sourced only to the subject's own website.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:36, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete Although the CBC news is reliable, the article is unlikely. 124.123.182.61 (talk) 23:13, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Aren't PR-professionals non-notable by definition? Ok, seriously, this simply fails WP:NBIO and is a 100% obvious WP:VANITY piece. (Since the creator disclosed in edit summary that this is "Paid editing"). At least the COI was properly disclosed. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 05:27, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete - per GNG. I think the client is owed a refund on this one. ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia  talk  12:40, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete I had draftified it in hopes that it would get improved and am very surprised to see it accepted from AfC without any substantial improvement. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 17:05, 22 July 2020 (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.