- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 08:01, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Keean Bexte
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Keean Bexte ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No reliable sources cited; doesn't appear to be encyclopedically notable per WP:NBIO. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 16:25, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Speedy Delete per WP:JOURNALIST. -- BonkHindrance ( talk) 16:29, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 16:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 16:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alberta-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 16:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Keep. The article contains references from three Swedish online papers. -- Fa alk ( talk) 11:22, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- Documented racist hate sites such as Samhällsnytt are the definition of non-reliable sources. This study from the Swedish Defence University explains and documents its status as a far-right anti-immigrant propaganda platform. You are welcome to open a discussion at the WP:RSN if you believe the site should be viewed as reliable. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 13:25, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. The notability test for journalists is not the ability to use their own primary source staff profiles on the websites of their own employers, or even their own published work for those employers, as verification that the person exists — it is the ability to show that they have been the subject of reliable source coverage written by other people. None of the sources present here represent what's required, and neither do any of the sources that were stripped from the article — even if we were to overlook the fact that the Swedish sources were mostly alt-right blogs and not real or reliable media, Keean Bexte still was not the subject of those sources, he was merely a name that got briefly mentioned in coverage whose core subject was somebody else. That's not the kind of sourcing we're looking for. Bearcat ( talk) 18:52, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per Bearcat. Best, GPL93 ( talk) 20:54, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 08:01, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
Keean Bexte
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Keean Bexte ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No reliable sources cited; doesn't appear to be encyclopedically notable per WP:NBIO. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 16:25, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Speedy Delete per WP:JOURNALIST. -- BonkHindrance ( talk) 16:29, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 16:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 16:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alberta-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 16:47, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Keep. The article contains references from three Swedish online papers. -- Fa alk ( talk) 11:22, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- Documented racist hate sites such as Samhällsnytt are the definition of non-reliable sources. This study from the Swedish Defence University explains and documents its status as a far-right anti-immigrant propaganda platform. You are welcome to open a discussion at the WP:RSN if you believe the site should be viewed as reliable. NorthBySouthBaranof ( talk) 13:25, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
- Delete. The notability test for journalists is not the ability to use their own primary source staff profiles on the websites of their own employers, or even their own published work for those employers, as verification that the person exists — it is the ability to show that they have been the subject of reliable source coverage written by other people. None of the sources present here represent what's required, and neither do any of the sources that were stripped from the article — even if we were to overlook the fact that the Swedish sources were mostly alt-right blogs and not real or reliable media, Keean Bexte still was not the subject of those sources, he was merely a name that got briefly mentioned in coverage whose core subject was somebody else. That's not the kind of sourcing we're looking for. Bearcat ( talk) 18:52, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
- Delete per Bearcat. Best, GPL93 ( talk) 20:54, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.