Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Håvar Mjeltevik

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. The "keep" opinions are mostly in the vein of WP:WAX or otherwise not very persuasive. Sandstein 10:43, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Håvar Mjeltevik[edit]

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

Biography of a person who sadly does not seem to meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG. I read Norwegian, so I have been trying to find more sources, but there just isn't significant coverage of him, that I can find. The existing references consist of a) a couple of articles about the fact that Mjeltevik was part of a team of students that won a stock market contest in 2010 (the assertion of "multiple top results" is not verified in the sources), b) a business listing for Mjeltevik's company, and c) an article about a related but different topic, which mentions his name in passing. There are also a couple of links to articles written by Mjeltevik, but all these taken together do not come close to showing notability. bonadea contributions talk 19:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Given that not many people on the English Wikipedia know how to read Norwegian, I think it should be deleted. Leoesb1032 (talk) 19:24, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment While I do think that the article should be deleted, I actually do not agree with that particular reason. Because most people on Wikipedia can't read Norwegian, it's all the more important that subjects they can't read about in the original language be covered in English, per WP:BIAS. But the subjects still have to be notable - the notability criterion is neither more nor less strict for non-Anglosphere subjects. --bonadea contributions talk 19:31, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, Mjeltevik is not the king of Norway, but I think he has his place on Wikipedia, specially with his writings and academic work. If you go this site: http://www.ungeaksjonaerer.no/tidligere-vinnere/ you will see that he his responsible for "multiple top results" with the group "Aksjegruppa HVE". Many biographies on Wikipedia has lower significance and usefulness that his.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Norwaytrader (talk • contribs) 20:53, 5 January 2013 (UTC)— Norwaytrader (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Keep: Yes from the start I agreed with you, Bonadea, but now the article has a lot more stuff in it and better references. I prefer to not delete this article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.15.95.57 (talk) 21:05, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, does not cut it. 21:12, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

CommentDo you have some examples of a good one in the same category? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.15.95.57 (talk) 21:19, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep:~~ With reference to this article: http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jan_Petter_Sissener I can't see that the article about Mjeltevik is poorer. Comments? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.15.95.57 (talk) 21:25, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Two things: other articles can never be used as an argument, and secondly, please only make one "keep" comment. This is not a vote but each individual contributor should only make one bolded "keep" or "delete" contribution. I have stricken your second "keep" above. --bonadea contributions talk 08:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: If you all see the other articles for deletions, this article is better.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎95.34.191.135 (talk • contribs) 03:11, January 6, 2014 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:42, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:42, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Note that on no.wikipedia, an admin speedy deleted the corresponding article about this person for lack of relevance. --bonadea contributions talk 10:44, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yes, but now the article is much better, better references, links. You can not compare to separate versions.95.34.191.135 (talk) 16:01, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not edit other people's comments as you did here - as noted above, each contributor only gets one "keep" or "delete" contribution in the discussion. In addition, I notice that you edited 46.15.95.57's comments earlier; it was obviously done in good faith, but please refrain from changing other people's words, because it can lead to annoyed feeings. Anyway, the article here on the English-language Wikipedia still does not show that the person is notable according to Wikipedia's definition of notability (it has not changed substantially since the article nomination), and it is relevant to this discussion to note that the Bokmål Wikipedia also did not consider him notable. In any case, I have no idea what the Bokmål version of the article looked like, and I assume you don't know either - as you say, the point is not to compare different versions of the article, but only to determine whether the subject of the article is notable. --bonadea contributions talk 16:28, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I kind find very little sources and being chairman of "Young chairholders" which is a kind of student organization for people interested in finance isn't a very important position that indicates notability. Iselilja (talk) 05:25, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Guerillero | My Talk 04:57, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete CEO of a non-notable trading firm with a past of having received a non-notable student award and being involved in a non-notable association. Fails WP:ANYBIO. AllyD (talk) 08:17, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
delete fails WP:BIO. 3 of the sources relate to routine student achievements. LibStar (talk) 10:38, 16 January 2014 (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.