Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Class Editori

: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. MBisanz ^talk 02:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

=[[Class Editori]]=

:{{la|Class Editori}} ([{{fullurl:Class Editori|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Class Editori}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Deleted once as copyvio, this version is a directory entry with no formal assertion of notability and no independent sources. Guy (Help!) 21:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Comment. I don't have time to go through the [http://news.google.co.uk/archivesearch?q=%22Class+Editori%22&btnG=Search&num=100&hl=en&um=1 743 Google News hits] at the moment (particularly as Italian is about my eighth language), but there's a good chance that there's enough there to establish notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:01, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 00:11, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Keep. Subject of [http://www.businessweek.com/1999/99_20/b3629158.htm lengthy article in BusinessWeek] and extensive coverage in Italian press (e.g. [http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/1998/novembre/17/Borsa_Class_Editori_esordio_dicembre_co_0_9811174541.shtml], [http://archiviostorico.corriere.it/1998/novembre/22/Class_Editori_domani_scatta_offerta_co_0_9811226741.shtml], [http://archivio.lastampa.it/LaStampaArchivio/main/History/tmpl_viewObj.jsp?objid=2261486]). Gr1st (talk) 17:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Keep That article just mentioned is enough by itself, and certainly is supplemented by the other material found. given the ease at finding material at Google news, it was careless to nominate this without looking. We really ought to require such searches for all afds where notability is in question,.DGG (talk) 19:22, 31 January 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. —Gr1st (talk) 22:27, 1 February 2009 (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.