Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Villa Kamogawa

Similar articles
Hey. I moved this to the talk page as I don't want to take up too much space in the main discussion. Those articles you mentioned (Villa Aurora, Massimo, French & American Academy in Rome) are not in good shape in terms of references, except for American Academy in Rome. If you look at the reference sections for the others, they appear to fail WP:GNG, which is our rule for the minimum number of good sources needed to have an article. It is possible somebody may nominate those for deletion.

The idea behind GNG is to enforce both notability (what is important enough to have an article) and verifiability (there needs to be enough written about something in reliable sources to write an article about it, else we are just writing unreliable things and our own opinions). The German article has the same sourcing problems... lots of company websites and such.

Company websites are primary sources. Secondary, independent, reliable sources with staff and editors such as newspapers, books, etc. are ideal. We rely on secondary, independent, reliable sources to get the WP:WEIGHT right. Else I could just publish 10 posts on my blog, and then write a Wikipedia article about it and link to my blog.

Anyway I hope you find my explanation helpful. I remember some of my first deletion discussions when I was a newer user and they were not fun, so I am just trying to explain the policies in hopefully a friendly way. – Novem Linguae (talk) 13:01, 27 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Hi . Thanks for the explanations. Much appreciated. I am aware of most of the basic guidelines. I just didn't know there was a list with rated reliability. What I'm trying to point out is that pretty much all such residencies' articles are poorly sourced, including the American Academy in Rome – the only really reliable source there apparently being the NYT, and it doesn't cover the institution specifically. Some of those institutions are centuries old, such as the French Academy, and have had a huge impact on the arts at a European or global level. Some of those articles are quite old too (WP French Academy is older than the WP:GNG article itself) and might need to catch up to shifting standards. I'm uncertain Deletion would be a service to the integrity of Wikipedia in such cases. The route I personally would prefer for now is to advance proper sourcing on all of those articles. This could be done by asking for expansion / sourcing instead of deletion with its complete loss of content. Just my 2 cents. Planetdust (talk) 14:28, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , good thoughts. Yeah, if good sources exist for those articles, hopefully at some point they will be added. – Novem Linguae (talk) 14:36, 27 February 2021 (UTC)