Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vincent LaMarca


 * 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. Per the additional sourcing found (non-admin closure) Nosebagbear (talk) 18:01, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Vincent LaMarca

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:BLPPROD requirement of articles containing "no sources in any form". However, it does not meet the requirement of "All BLPs must have at least one source that supports at least one statement made about the person in the article". Snowycats (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Snowycats (talk) 17:10, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:58, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment. I have found a proper source and added it to the article. That said, I have no opinion yet about whether the subject is notable enough to warrant an article. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:42, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 15:28, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment - I added three additional sources and more content. It's still a thin article, but has potential.  Orville1974  (talk) 22:46, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep A major Hollywood film based on his life was made, called City by the Sea and starring Robert DeNiro. That movie was based on a lengthy article about LaMarca that appeared in Esquire magazine in 1997. When the movie was released, many newspapers wrote about LaMarca, and not just passing mentions. Coverage in the Los Angeles Times runs for 29 paragraphs and LaMarca, not the movie, is the main focus of that article. There was also a lengthy article in the New York Daily News not currently used as a reference. Yes, the article is thin but the potential for expansion is obvious. Cullen328  Let's discuss it  03:00, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep. I can't fault the nominating editor for nominating this, based on the condition of the article at the time of the nomination, but a couple edits made since then have pretty clearly established notability. TJRC (talk) 20:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep A.Jacobin (talk) 14:53, 27 June 2019 (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.