Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Franco Fiorito
without prejudice against recreation if somebody can do better. There is an article on the Italian Wikipedia, which is a lot longer and cites a lot more references than this — but given what a cursory attempt ''this'' is, it's fairly clear that the creator's intention had less to do with writing a proper article about a notable politician and more do do with shining a floodlight on the corruption allegation that they chose to single out as the ''only'' thing they said about him ''at all'' besides "he exists". This is giving the allegation  weight, however: people who were not already notable ''before'' being accused of a crime do ''not'' clear the bar on the accusation itself. Properly contextualized in a longer, properly sourced article which properly establishes that he was already notable in the first place, we're allowed to mention criminal allegations — but we do not create articles ''just'' to foreground untried and unconvicted criminal allegations as the ''basis'' for a person's notability in and of itself. But I cannot read Italian, so I cannot determine whether the Italian article actually establishes that he would clear our notability standards — being ''sindaco'' (i.e. mayor) of a small town is not particularly promising, and the Italian article problematically includes ten references to YouTube videos, which is ten more than any Wikipedia article should ever be citing. So I'm not 100 per cent certain that he would be notable even ''with'' a full translation of the existing Italian article, and would need to see the actual finished product before I gave my final verdict on that — but in the meantime, what I am 100 per cent certain of is that if a stub that's just 37 words long devotes nine (or 25 per cent) of those words to calling the subject corrupt, that's wildly inappropriate and needs to be deleted on  grounds. So even if he is actually notable enough for an article, this version should still be |blown up and restarted from scratch
— User:Bearcat, 14:56, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:UNDUE||WP:BLP||WP:TNT (Wikipedia:Neutral point of view)