Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Villas in Naples
per , no issues that aren't fixable through ordinary editing or redevelopment. I can only guess at the way in which the nominator thinks this is indiscriminate as no explanation is given. Not passing LISTN doesn't mean deletion is necessarily merited unless it's an oddball classification;  is more relevant when we have an ordinary list of things by place. Looking at this list's potential as an index, we have five articles apart from this list in :Category:Villas in Naples, which may or may not be enough, but many more if we go the next level up by place to :Category:Villas in Campania, or even to the country level at :Category:Villas in Italy, neither of which have a corresponding list. So this really is the kind of list that shouldn't be brought to AFD, but instead per ATD should be evaluated in terms of either further development at this scope or more broadly. Editors may decide there is justification for listing these at the Naples level because of existing or possible articles, and/or that it should also include entries that don't merit articles, or that it should be expanded to a wider geographic area.  A further comment to the nominator: next time you list an article for deletion, don't leave it to the commenters to do this work for you, but instead walk us through the application of the guidelines to the content, and explain if, as here, there are related articles or categories. See  as well as ATD. Otherwise it looks like a drive-by nomination rather than a thoughtful analysis
— User:Postdlf, 17:30, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:ATD||WP:LISTPURP||WP:BEFORE (Wikipedia:Deletion policy)