Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hannu Vuorinen

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Consensus in this particular case is that the Olympic RFC is not as relevant as he meets the GNG based on English and Finnish sourcing covering other elements of his career. Star Mississippi 14:31, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hannu Vuorinen[edit]

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

Hannu Vuorinen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability, google search didn't turn up anything. Not presumed to be notable under WP:NOLYMPICS, either. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 13:05, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

However, Vuorinen would have needed to win their National title to qualify for the Olympics, which indeed he did in 1983. --Donniediamond (talk) 13:33, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The RfC said non-medalists at the Olympics are not notable. Keep votes that ignore this rule should be ignored. The additional coverage is not in-depth enough to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:37, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    From WP:NSPORT: Please note that the failure to meet these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The RfC said non-medalists at the Olympics are not notable Stop perpetuating this incorrectly. The RFC says they aren't presumed notable, but they can pass GNG. Asserting outright that people without medals are not notable is incorrect. Especially when it seems you never bother to WP:BEFORE before commenting. Joseph2302 (talk) 16:04, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the RfC may have changed NOLY but he still passes NBOX. To quality for the 1984 Olympics a boxer must have won their national championships. This boxer won the 1983 and 1984 National title and therefore passes NBOX.--Donniediamond (talk) 15:10, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. The first and second source provided by Lugnuts might be significant coverage, but they are identical, so even if they are significant we still need two more sources. The third source is both not significant and not reliable, being a single sentence on a boxing clubs website. WP:NOLYMPICS only presumes notability if the individual medalled, and WP:NBOX doesn't presume notability for winning a national title. BilledMammal (talk) 14:53, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment that is incorrect, the does pass NBOX one of the criteria is to "have fought, as an amateur, in the final of a national amateur championship for an AIBA affiliated and World Amateur Boxing Championship medal-winning country (for Men, see Medal table (1974–present)".
Not only did Vuorinen compete in the a final he won it two years in a row - 1983 and 1984. --Donniediamond (talk) 15:07, 26 January 2022 (UTC)--Donniediamond (talk) 15:07, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Donniediamond NBOX does not supersede GNG. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 15:21, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Given that he was a professional boxer, I assumed that the Finnish Lightweight Championship were not an amateur championship. However, even if it was amateur, WP:NBOX only creates a presumption of notability; WP:GNG still needs to be met. BilledMammal (talk) 15:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment he was both an amateur boxer and a professional boxer. Although more noted for his wins in the amateur code. --Donniediamond (talk) 15:39, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, can't read Finnish but willing to AGF its SIGCOV. Plus if he passes NBOX (failing another SNG is irrelevant) more coverage likely exists in his home country (anybody know of a Finnish newspaper archive?). BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep looks like Finnish sources exist, including some offline ones, there are some more sources at the Finnish article. A WP:BEFORE doesn't look to have been done, and we shouldn't only be looking for English sources to claim "non-notability". Joseph2302 (talk) 16:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    The helsingtarmo.fi source is a passing mention, Ilt a sanomat is a large Finnish digital newspaper but I don't know how much their obituaries indicate notability so let's assume they do, and the offline source (Defenders of Our Sports Honors - Representatives of the Finnish Olympics 1906–2000 , p. 363) seems like a passing mention in a book about all Finnish Olympians, while the rest are sports databases. That means in the Finnish article there is one notable obituary and a single page of a book about Olympians, which to me doesn't seem to indicate notability. I'm willing to assume there might be Finnish sources that I'm unaware of and not in the fi.wp article, but it's also important to note that Local sources must be independent of the subject, and must provide reports beyond routine game coverage (from WP:NSPORTS) as well. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 07:17, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I know, but you've asserted no sources exist in your AFD nomination, and that's been proven incorrect, as some exist. If someone had access to a Finnish language newspaper archive, seems likely there would be more sources, but you shouldn't be expecting English speakers to know and have access to these sources. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:44, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I asserted that I myself didn't find any sources that indicated notability. That's different from saying no sources exist. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 12:52, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - seems quite adequate. Deb (talk) 19:04, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. His professional career was unremarkable, but his amateur achievements justify inclusion I think. There are further sources available, e.g. [4] - a newspaper source for his olympic result if we want to avoid using stats sites, and [5] - confirms his gold in the Tammer tournament in 1982. --Michig (talk) 21:00, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - I'm not sufficiently well versed with how WP:NSPORTS is usually interpreted, and thus refrain from !voting, but here are a few more Finnish-language online refs: Obituary in MTV uutiset, Obituary in Turun Sanomat, Obituary in Iltalehti (nb: different paper than Ilta Sanomat). Given that these are all very similar in content, I assume the obituary was published originally by the Finnish news wire, Finnish News Agency. I suspect there are other newspaper articles about the subject too, but access to newspaper archives from approx 1950s to early 2000s is tricky, as those papers are not yet accessible via e.g. the national archive's online search, and online news weren't common either. -Ljleppan (talk) 09:46, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Ljleppan thanks for finding those sources. Is there some wiki guideline on obituaries? At least in my city obituaries come out relatively frequently for people of not much notability, but I know things like NYT obituaries are good at establishing notability. A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 10:45, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not aware of any specific guidance on obituaries, but I think this part from a WP:SIGCOV footnote is relevant: "Several journals simultaneously publishing different articles does not always constitute multiple works, especially when the authors are relying on the same sources, and merely restating the same information.". If most of these obituaries are based on the same basic news wire text, I'd be hesitant to count them as separate sources for the purposes of SIGCOV. On the other hand, clearly there's a difference between a case where a single local newspaper publishes an obituary, and a case where the national news wire publishes an obituary that is then republished by multiple national newspapers. It's unfortunate that I don't have access to the Helsingin Sanomat news story or to the book Urheilukunniamme puolustajat – Suomen olympiaedustajat 1906–2000 (which is used as a ref in fi.wp) to figure out what the depth of that coverage is. To be quite honest, I don't know how to best interpret this. -Ljleppan (talk) 11:00, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, I seem to have missed a part of your question: these do not appear to be obituaries of the type submitted by e.g. the family (those would called kuolinilmoitus in Finnish, there's a separate section for these in the newspaper, and they are not usually published online). The linked texts are obituaries in the sense of "a news story, under editorial control of the newspaper, written by journalists, where the main news is that someone died." -Ljleppan (talk) 11:08, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree, but sometimes there are obituaries in newspapers that are only published in one city or sub-province, (e.g.Deia (newspaper)) A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 12:22, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Agreed that those types of obituaries are significantly less persuasive. The ones I linked are rather large by Finnish standards, with at least some being "national" level newspapers. And the original wire (which I'm assuming they are based on) would also be a national thing (perhaps even "Nordic", depending on whether the wire service was also serving Sweden at the time). So on their face, they would appear to be good indicia of notability. But then we get to the point where this appears to be a case of multiple newspapers publishing the same wire story, rather than intellectually separate works. Given that, I'd say the obituaries taken together really count as only one "publication" for WP:GNG purposes. That leaves us in the tricky situation of one good ref (the obits) and two potential references I don't have access to (the book used in fi.wp and the Helsingin Sanomat news story. -Ljleppan (talk) 12:36, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @Ljleppan: You can log in to hs.fi and access that article with the username ([email protected]) and the password (8ugmenot). JTtheOG (talk) 22:41, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. For the benefit of those not speaking Finnish, the Helsingin Sanomat article is kind of a double-bio of Hannu and his brother. I'd say it counts for SIGCOV purposes, given it's 14 paras and 400+ words in what I believe is the largest newspaper in Finland. -Ljleppan (talk) 07:57, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Sure. In that case we'd have the hs.fi article, the news wire obituary, and likely more in newspapers of the age in Finland that we can't access due to not being digitally available, Ljleppan? A. C. Santacruz ⁂ Please ping me! 11:53, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, the access situation to this era of news articles is less than stellar. Here are a few I did manage to find from Helsingin Sanomat (titles rough translations): "Joni Nyman and Hannu Vuorinen to hit it off for a European Championship qualifying match" (12 paras total, discusses multiple boxers), "Nyman heads to EC-qualifiers, Nyholm continues undefeated, Vuorinen to undergo arm surgery" (14 paras total, discusses multiple boxers), Grönroos quits, the gang of three continues (7 paras, with a short mention of Vuorinen: "Finnish professional boxing rests on three [persons]. Joni Nyman, Hannu Vuorinen and Jan Nyholm are the only remaining shirtless, when [two other boxers] hang up their gloves"). Not massively detailed bios or anything, but more than just a match result in a long list. Since he's mentioned in the big national papers, I'd imagine there's additional stuff in regional newspapers etc. but then again I can't promise that and "there might be additional sources" is not a great argument for AFD. Not too certain what to think about this one. -Ljleppan (talk) 12:40, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – gold medallist and top of their respective sport in non-Olympic competitions so WP:NOLYMPICS notability level isn't relevant here, sufficient amount of sources available too. --Jkaharper (talk) 15:06, 28 January 2022 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hannu_Vuorinen&oldid=1073151015"