- 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 keep. WP:SNOW czar 03:47, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Roland Paulsen
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Roland Paulsen ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not appear to pass any of our subject specific notability guidelines, nor WP:GNG. A loose noose ( talk) 20:51, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka ( talk) 21:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka ( talk) 21:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka ( talk) 21:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Comment So, an AfD nomination for a five-hour old article that is clearly a translation-in-progress of the article at sv.wikipedia [1], which has sources and also notes that he won the Johan Hansson Prize [2]? Bakazaka ( talk) 21:56, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Agree, this is over the top. With 3 academic texts, two published in both Swedish and English, he is highly likely to meet WP:NAUTHOR, let alone considering whether he meets WP:ACADEMIC. On what basis does the Nom claim that he "Does not appear to pass any of our subject specific notability guidelines"? If there is concern about it not being a finished article, just move it to draft space, don't send it to AfD! RebeccaGreen ( talk) 23:45, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- @ RebeccaGreen: I agree with you that this is a ridiculous deletion nomination, as I voted to keep the Polina Kuklina article as well. I have said before and strongly believe that too much deletion for no good reason is in no one's best interest. I also don't understand why people are often putting deletion tags on very credible articles as well, which might make a lot less people want to create articles, which we surely don't want. Davidgoodheart ( talk) 07:57, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: won a notable prize so probably passes WP:PROF someone just needs to translate it. If nobody does, send it to draft. SITH (talk) 00:56, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep - passes WP:NAUTHOR and WP:GNG. BabbaQ ( talk) 22:36, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Please don't take articles that are clearly in the process of being created to AfD? There's no harm in waiting a week. Beyond that, the Swedish article gives plenty of sources, in addition to the ones used here. For contextualisation, Paulsen is somewhat of a household name in Sweden, being at the heart of the Swedish debate around the concept of work. He's – as the Swedish sources indicate – regularly either part of or referred to in the national debate about current practices around work, as well as the future of work. Strong keep. / Julle ( talk) 23:28, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep, per the reasons given by people who are in favor in keeping this article. Davidgoodheart ( talk) 07:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- WP:SNOW Keep. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 23:25, 23 February 2019 (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 keep. WP:SNOW czar 03:47, 25 February 2019 (UTC)
Roland Paulsen
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Roland Paulsen ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not appear to pass any of our subject specific notability guidelines, nor WP:GNG. A loose noose ( talk) 20:51, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka ( talk) 21:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka ( talk) 21:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka ( talk) 21:28, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Comment So, an AfD nomination for a five-hour old article that is clearly a translation-in-progress of the article at sv.wikipedia [1], which has sources and also notes that he won the Johan Hansson Prize [2]? Bakazaka ( talk) 21:56, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Agree, this is over the top. With 3 academic texts, two published in both Swedish and English, he is highly likely to meet WP:NAUTHOR, let alone considering whether he meets WP:ACADEMIC. On what basis does the Nom claim that he "Does not appear to pass any of our subject specific notability guidelines"? If there is concern about it not being a finished article, just move it to draft space, don't send it to AfD! RebeccaGreen ( talk) 23:45, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
- @ RebeccaGreen: I agree with you that this is a ridiculous deletion nomination, as I voted to keep the Polina Kuklina article as well. I have said before and strongly believe that too much deletion for no good reason is in no one's best interest. I also don't understand why people are often putting deletion tags on very credible articles as well, which might make a lot less people want to create articles, which we surely don't want. Davidgoodheart ( talk) 07:57, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep: won a notable prize so probably passes WP:PROF someone just needs to translate it. If nobody does, send it to draft. SITH (talk) 00:56, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep - passes WP:NAUTHOR and WP:GNG. BabbaQ ( talk) 22:36, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep. Please don't take articles that are clearly in the process of being created to AfD? There's no harm in waiting a week. Beyond that, the Swedish article gives plenty of sources, in addition to the ones used here. For contextualisation, Paulsen is somewhat of a household name in Sweden, being at the heart of the Swedish debate around the concept of work. He's – as the Swedish sources indicate – regularly either part of or referred to in the national debate about current practices around work, as well as the future of work. Strong keep. / Julle ( talk) 23:28, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
- Keep, per the reasons given by people who are in favor in keeping this article. Davidgoodheart ( talk) 07:40, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
- WP:SNOW Keep. E.M.Gregory ( talk) 23:25, 23 February 2019 (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.