Deletion of Buttigieg De Piro (2nd nomination)

Comment: Alright ... here we go.  First off, almost all the non-self-published sources Tancarville cites are unavailable for review to the vast majority of Wikipedia editors, which debars them from qualifying as |reliable sources.  For the non-English language texts,  holds the following: "Where editors use non-English sources, they should ensure that readers can verify for themselves the content of the original material and the reliability of its author/publisher ... Translations published by reliable sources are preferred over translations made by Wikipedia editors
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:V)

Comment: There is no animosity towards Malta; but policies are policies and they should be followed. No one has yet succeeded in verifying these sources, and therefore the article fails . There are notability concerns () if no one can find much about any of the holders of the title. In two years, the article hasn't changed, and therefore there are sufficient concerns to warrant deletion
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:N)

Comment: per  (even if this were a notable title it wouldn't necessarily confer any notability on its current claimant) and  (contains no information about the purported subject of the article but has been used as an excuse to pack in all sorts of claims about other things
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:INHERITED||WP:COATRACK)