Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Episcopia (3rd nomination)

James Episcopia

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

Fails WP:CRIME, insignificant gangster - DonCalo (talk) 18:17, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Episcopia does not pass WP:Crime. There is information on Episcopia in the Bonanno crime family#Former members section. --Vic49 (talk) 18:26, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Vic49 (talk) 21:42, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Vic49 (talk) 21:42, 16 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect to Bonanno crime family#Former members. Article subject fails WP:CRIME and is not notable enough for his own article.--Slon02 (talk) 15:51, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Episcopia does not pass WP:Crime. --Cox wasan (talk) 19:48, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~Opinion on hold - see below If that's all there is to say about him, rub him out... Peridon (talk) 23:23, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not notable Rogermx (talk) 23:48, 17 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Thought it worth mentioning the article was blanked [1] before being nominated. 72.74.220.50 (talk) 06:30, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Mind you, the removal of material was in June and it's not been contested. Anyone else care to comment? Peridon (talk) 13:30, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Even if the old unreferenced information was included he still is just a minor gangster that does not meet WP:CRIME. - DonCalo (talk) 13:37, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Was it unreferenced, or was it actually referenced by the books listed? Referencing doesn't have to be from the internet. It makes our lives easier if it is available online, but there's nothing that says it must be. Peridon (talk) 17:54, 18 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]