Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gunnar Stansson

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. ✗plicit 07:11, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Gunnar Stansson

[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)

Self-promotional page has been deleted before because it fails WP:CREATIVE and appears to have been created/maintained by its subject. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.175.200.238 (talk) 04:07, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This article has been deleted multiple times because of notability concerns and because it appears to be self-promotional, but continues to be recreated. In addition, almost the entire article is based on just one of the four listed sources — a Q&A with the article's subject that appeared on a now-defunct blog. That anonymously produced "interview" doesn't seem to meet the standards of a reliable source, and I have concerns (although I do not have the ability to prove it) that the article's subject has been involved in the editing and resurrections of this page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.175.200.238 (talk) 03:58, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Completing nomination on behalf of IP editor. Rationale copypasted from WP:AFT and from Talk:Gunnar Stansson. Sam Sailor 07:39, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 07:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 07:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 07:42, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Clearly fails WP:ENTERTAINER, verifiability is nonexistant and relies entirely on primary sources, and contains promotional and opinionated text. Uses x (talk • contribs) 17:38, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete; obviously falls short of notability at present, with no prejudice to the future. With my admin hat on, I declined this as G11—it's not blatant in its promotion—but can clearly endorse its deletion here at AfD. {{Nihiltres |talk |edits}} 00:09, 27 May 2021 (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.