Talk:Gabriel Traversari

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

Anyone else think this article reads like a vanity entry?

Yes, it's obvious this dude wrote his own wiki page lol. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 43.249.130.117 (talk) 09:50, 6 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious vanity entry, hardly any valid links/sources, it should be removed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.99.97.186 (talk) 13:12, 18 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Gabriel Traversari. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:03, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't meet WP:N guidelines?[edit]

Even if there was "significant" third-party notability (which there doesn't seem to have ever been....I remember coming to this article years ago and it was only the person that was the topic of the article that was insistent on it remaining up, to include being offended if readers mentioned his lack of notability and requested the article be reviewed for WP:N), external links and references look to be non-existent or archived/no longer in operation.

I think this article can safely be removed from Wikipedia. 2600:1702:4850:2CD0:CDEE:69CA:1112:AED3 (talk) 16:14, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]