Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anders Holmer

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 09:10, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Anders Holmer[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Promotional page created by blocked editor. No evidence page passes WP:AUTHOR--being nominated for an award does not garner assumed notability. WikiLibrary search did not return any WP:RS. Cabrils (talk) 05:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, a simple google search reveals several book reviews in WP:RS: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5]. Geschichte (talk) 10:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Authors, Visual arts, and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:47, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Geschichte's sources are all good, but they're short. It's too early in his career for more substantial coverage. But when I was looking for more, I found that at least one of his books have been translated into English. Here are its reviews in Kirkus [6] and PW [7]. I'm confident there will be more. But because it's children's literature, I'm also confident they'll be short. -- asilvering (talk) 12:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep nominee for both the August Prize and the Beskow Plaquette, with substantial coverage in mainstream Swedish press. The article is weak, but notability is not a problem, not nearly. Draken Bowser (talk) 13:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Brief reviews as given in a few other comments have been found, but we have more than enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think this passes "has won significant critical attention". /Julle (talk) 17:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – Clear pass of GNG, while not respecting NAUTHOR. Substantial sources found on Google worth adding onto the article. Toadette ^{(Let's discuss together!)} 18:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:BIO. And WP:GNG. BabbaQ (talk) 14:55, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.