Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maria Filotti

Maria Filotti

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article does not have verifiable references. The only reference indicated is a dead link. Afil (talk) 01:29, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep That's not a rationale for deletion, unless you're saying the entire article is factually inaccurate. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 03:02, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This AfD nomination is a perfect example of why we have a procedure that is supposed to be followed before nominating an article for deletion. This simple procedure can be found at WP:BEFORE Point #4. It reads, "Before nominating due to sourcing or notability concerns, make a good-faith attempt to confirm that such sources don't exist." I had never heard of Maria Filotti before running across this AfD. I entered her name into Google Books, and 30 seconds later, I knew for sure that she was notable. Just take a look at the mentions in the very first book that comes up: An Abridged history of Romanian theatre, by Simion Alterescu which describes her as among the "prestigious actors of the great realistic school" and called her the "directress" of a theater "that made an important contribution to transmitting the experience from one generation to the next." If the nominator had done what I had done, then that editor could simply have added that source to the article, and several others readily available, and saved us all some time and trouble.Cullen328 (talk) 03:26, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Please note that the nominator may possibly have a conflict of interest regarding people named "Filotti". See their user page for more information. Cullen328 (talk) 03:32, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think this is some misunderstanding of how things work here on Wikipedia. Maria Filotti is a notable personality of Romanian theatre. The theatre in Brăila is called after her - Maria Filotti Theatre [1]. --Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 04:39, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Sufficient career achievement to merit encyclopedic biography. Carrite (talk) 05:36, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep definitely notable per Vejvančický, though I'll admit the article doesn't exactly assert notability very clearly. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 07:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep - for an actress dead over 50 years, it's telling that the press is still writing articles about her life. I propose closing this pointy nomination: sure, the nominator is miffed that we've eliminated non-notable Filottis from the encyclopedia, like Victor Filotti and Liviu Filotti, but Maria is one of the few whose notability is immediately obvious, and we need not spend any more time on this. - Biruitorul ^Talk 14:07, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:33, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am perfectly aware that subject is notable. I am not miffed at anything, I just wanted to show in this case compliance with WP:BEFORE has been invoked. However this was never done for the articles proposed for deletion by User:Biruitorul. I am not even disputing at this point the notability of the other articles. I simply think that if discussions are carried out in good faith, then the WP:BEFORE steps should be carried out and that double standards should be eliminated. In the previous proposals, the arguments were only that the references indicated were insufficient. So much for the fairness of the process. Afil (talk) 02:18, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is worth noting that none of the other Filottis with entries up for deletion (or since deleted) qualifies as BEFORE, simply because they are not mentioned in reliable sources (unless we really stretch the definition to include all sorts of booklets, and even these are in remarkably short supply). The case has been made both individually and collectively (beginning with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ligia Filotti), and I personally took pains to explain this to Afil in clear and accessible terms. Claim debunked, let's move on. Dahn (talk) 15:57, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This is a case of WP:POINT from a vexed user. He himself says: "I am perfectly aware that subject is notable." Just because the article is of poor quality (I think Afil, as its creator, may know why), there is nothing to make it deletable, unlike most of the many other Filotti etc. articles Afil has also graced wikipedia with. See the most recent of them on Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Romania. Dahn (talk) 15:50, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep subject passes WP:NACTOR. But I don't agree with most comments posted here. The article itself could not be considered encyclopedic in its present situation. What we need to do is trying to find a Wikipedian who speaks both English and Romanian and who could maybe translate the impressing article about this actress in Romanian. It could be done via one of the projects here, described in WP:TRANSLATE. Ingadres (talk) 20:46, 10 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]