This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Italy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Italy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ItalyWikipedia:WikiProject ItalyTemplate:WikiProject ItalyItaly articles
@RoySmith: I try to review every draft with fresh eyes. That means not assuming prior reviews were necessarily correct or still apply, but not ignoring them either. The problems called out before were: biographical notability and verifiability.
The article's WP:THREE are Gazzetta di Modena,[1]il Giornale,[2] and Berliner Kurier.[3] They get a bit lost among references of questionable independence (musical.it, Palermomania.it, spettacolinews.it, teatro.it - all of which look suspiciously like press releases) or questionable reliability (TuttoDanza, Peeparrow, Cultweek, Lifestyleblog.it, Musical Vienna, wein-ticket.at, avb.amstetten.at, and buehnenlichter.de), but the three are sufficient to pass WP:BASIC and they are not the only independent, reliable sources cited.
When I started stepping through the draft I was adding {{cn}} tags right and left, but found that with each additional source I analysed, I was going back and removing most of them. The problem is not verifiability, but structure. The second tiny paragraph, for example, may appear to be unsourced, but the content is supported by the source cited at the end of the third tiny paragraph. Any remaining problems are best addressed in mainspace.
I don't particularly like the article, but don't see a policy/guideline-based reason for it not to be accepted. There is a cadre of reviewers who openly ignore the guidelines, on the grounds that they're highly experienced, and "know what belongs" in Wikipedia and what doesn't. Their attitude is useful in keeping out some articles that I agree don't belong, but where the guidelines are perhaps too weak. That path seems to lead to anarchy, however, and I can't bring myself to ignore the guidelines even if I dislike the draft. --Worldbruce (talk) 16:25, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
