Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nils Janson

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2009 February 27.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. — Aitias // discussion 00:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nils Janson[edit]

Delete fails WP:MUSIC, has only a debut album. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:19, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination fails to take into account there are 12 WP:MUSIC criteria. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Which of the 12 do you contend he meets? No nomination is required or expected to negate all aspects of the criteria; see WP:BURDEN. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 17:59, 13 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Out of the 12 criteria he meets 4,7 and 12 out of which at least #12 can be verified.
4.He's been mentioned several times in German and Austrian press concerning his participation in tours with Mando Diao. Trivial or not? I don't know.
7.He is one of the most notable musicians of the Jazz scene in Stockholm, Sweden.
12.February 6th, 2009 swedish national radio (SR) had a 90 minutes broadcast of a live consert with his quartet. http://www.sr.se/cgi-bin/p2/program/artikel.asp?ProgramID=3015&Nyheter=1&artikel=2605657 Ikterus (talk) 09:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete Criteria 12 might work if there is coverage in reliable sources but the others are unverifiable. sounds unlikely that criteria 4 would be significant coverage and 7 would need to be verified. Overall there seems very little to create the article with. --neon white talk 20:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In my mind there is no question about Criteria 12. The other criterias are indeed weaker and can be disregarded in further discussion. Verification of criteria 12 is in swedish (see link above) but the criteria is nonetheless met. For your information P2 is one of four nationally broadcast public radio stations in Sweden. The show was 120 minutes out of 90 min was solely about Nils Janson's music. Ikterus (talk) 14:10, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest an article of this length this is depending on swedish sources for both notability and sourcing is probably better transwikid to Swedish wikipedia. --neon white talk 16:31, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nevertheless, criteria 12 IS met. If there is a criteria that say that sources have to be in english then so be it. Is there such a criteria? Since I've tried to keep the article clean from uncontrolable info I've kept the article short, but the article in Swedish wikipedia has a lot more info with swedish sources to back it up. Ikterus (talk) 09:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is no criterion that sources have to be in English. Phil Bridger (talk) 13:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why on earth should it be transwikied to Swedish Wikipedia? How then would those of us who read English but not Swedish be able to find out about the subject? Remember that Wikipedia exists for its readers, not for the convenience of people checking sources for the purposes of a deletion debates. The concept of verifiability doesn't mean that sources have to be verifiable by everyone with no effort. Would you expect, for example, Manx Wikipedia to be restricted to subjects that can be sourced in Manx? Of course not, so why should you be trying to put an equivalent artificial restriction on what sources can be used in English Wikipedia? Phil Bridger (talk) 13:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiking to different language areas is an accepted procedure on wikipedia if a subject only has relevence in a particular language. In this case the article is likely to be a permanent stub due to lack of verifiable sources and has no notability outside his home country. --neon white talk 17:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide any evidence that this is an "accepted procedure"? Tranwikiing to another language is sometimes done when article is written in that language, but not because the sources are in another language. And how can an article only have relevance in one language? This is an encyclopedia that covers the whole world, not just the anglosphere. If sources are available to write an acceptable article in Swedish then the same sources can be used to write an article in English. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems very unlikely to happen and the sources are scarce even in Swedish. Maybe we need to copy from the swedish article as it seems to have some more sources [1]. Either way this is going to require a swedish speaker. --neon white talk 20:43, 20 February 2009 (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.