Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kate - la bisbetica domata

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 no consensus.  Sandstein  09:43, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

Kate - la bisbetica domata

Kate - la bisbetica domata (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

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

Source searches are providing no significant coverage to qualify an article; does not meet aspects of WP:NFILM and does not meet WP:GNG. Only finding passing mentions, such as [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:07, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:07, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:08, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 19:08, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sarahj2107 (talk) 11:06, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

• Keep, the article already had 6 citations to reliable sources like the major Italian national newspapers La Repubblica and Corriere della Sera, complete with quotations. I've added some archive sources also. And it won an award. Chiswick Chap (talk) 19:42, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Walton (talk) 17:38, 19 November 2016 (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.