Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Sachs

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 no consensus‎. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 08:06, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Daniel Sachs

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Daniel Sachs (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)

Fails WP:SIGCOV. Refs are passing mentions, profiles, about us pages and other misc/non-specific coverage. Fails WP:BIO. scope_creep^Talk 11:56, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

What is WP:SICOV? Ruccc (talk) 12:38, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

@Ruccc, Scoop creep mean WP:SIGCOV. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

Understood! Ruccc (talk) 14:50, 30 September 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Sweden. Shellwood (talk) 12:47, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
• Delete: Fails WP:ANYBIO. Sources from article and WP:BEFORE do not meet the minimum guideline. Could not even find three sources that satisfy GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
• Delete - Could not find enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to pass WP:GNG.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:06, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
• Comment. I've done a quick search in a Swedish media archive and there seems to be plenty of (significant) Swedish newspaper coverage. I'll make time at some point in the coming days to go though the most promising hits and add them to the article (or retract this statement if it turns out that my first glance was mistaken). /Julle (talk) 18:08, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, and Theatre. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:11, 30 September 2024 (UTC)
• Comment - There is a long history dating back to 2007 associated with this title, including articles about this person that were cut down to redirects, redirects from this person to a company, and articles about a fictional person. If this person fails biographical notablity, a redirect should be kept as an alternative to deletion to preserve the history. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)
• Keep. I've taken a look at some of the articles in the Swedish news archive now and I'm convinced this easily passes WP:GNG. For example, he gets three pages in Dagens Nyheter (the dominating daily newspaper in Sweden) in 2017, and nine pages (haven't found the online equivalent) in Dagens Industri (the most important financial newspaper in Sweden) a couple of months ago. Much of this is interview material, but not all of it, and there's enough other material here to build something from. There are substantial reporting on his role as CEO of Proventus and of him leaving it (I've added an example). He was one of the hosts of Sommar (radio program) in 2013, where every episode generates reviews in national media; I've added one of them. In short, his role not just as a entrepeneur but as a powerful person in Swedish culture has been reflected in the Swedish news, and this means there's enough for us to build an encyclopedic entry on. /Julle (talk) 22:16, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
• Blank and Redirect as alternative to deletion. A review of the references shows that they are press releases or passing mentions.

Reference Number	Reference	Comments	Independent	Significant	Reliable	Secondary
1	birthday.se	Appears to be a file of birthdays of people. This establishes that he exists.	Yes	No	Probably not. Probably user-provided.	?
2	www.dn.se/kultur-noje/	An interview	No.	Yes	Yes	No
3	en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagens_industri	This is probably an improperly entered reference, but it links to a Wikipedia article. So it is either incorrectly formed or circular	?	Not about the subject	No.	?
4	news.cision.com	Announcement that he has left a company.	Probably not. Reads like a press release.	Yes	Probably	No
5	www.dagensmedia.se	Another announcement that he has left the company.	Probably not. Reads like a press release.	Yes	Probably	No
6	www.di.se/nyheter	A press release about a job change	No.	Yes.	Probably	No
7	www.realtid.se	A list of attendees at Davos	Yes	No, passing mention.	Probably	Yes
8	www.opensocietyfoundations.org	A profile as one of the directors of the foundation	No.	Yes	Probably	No
9	web.archive.org/web	An account of the founding of the Höj Rösten Foundation	Yes	No, passing mention.	Probably	No
10	www.dn.se	A press release that "Sachs wants to scrutinize capitalism"	No.	Yes	Probably	No
11	www.forbes.com/sites/worldeconomicforum	A Forbes contributor piece	No.	No, passing mention of subject.	No.	No
12	www.apolitical.foundation	Profiles of board members	No.	Yes	No.	No
13	www.resume.se	Another press release	No.	Yes	No.	No

This source assessment table is based on this version of the article: [1]. References were added to the article while I was assessing the sources, and I revised the table. The addition of more sources was not material.

As noted above, there is an extensive history, which includes previous versions of articles on the subject, as well as redirects, and an article about a fictional person. This article should be cut down to a redirect. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:49, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

User:Robert McClenon: I'm sorry, but I don't think this reflects the reality of some of the sources in the article. Comments below.

1. Agreed.

2. Mostly an interview, but also covers other material, which I'd argue is secondary. Described above.

3. No, the wiki link follows the norm for how we cover press material, same as other sources in the article – the name of the publication is linked. Not the name of the article, which is an offline source (or accessible though sv:Mediearkivet). Not all sources are online sources. This is nine pages in Dagens Industri, mostly but not only interview material. Described above. Can be checked by pretty much anyone with a Swedish university account (or access to Mediearkivet, provided to some editors by Wikimedia Sweden). As noted above, I've not been able to locate the online equivalent.

4. Agreed.

5. Disagree. Unlikely this is merely a press release, for four reasons: a) Unlike Cision, Dagens Media does produce journalism, which merits that we take a closer look; b) it's the same day as the press release in 4., but with different content, noting things which were not present in that press release c) it's signed (Eva Wisten), d) it contains material unlikely to have been in a press relase, such as noting that he'll "be on paternal leave and think". This reads like a reaction to the press release in 4., but someone actually having written an article based on other sources.

6. Definitely not. This is an article, takes up most of a page in the leading Swedish financial newspaper, and doesn't read at all like a press release to me. Why do you think it would be one?

7. Agreed.

8. Agreed.

9. Agreed.

10. Uncertain. Not terribly interesting as a source anyway.

11. Agreed.

12. Agreed.

13. Agreed.

14. (In the current version.) Missing. Added before this was posted, but after the assessment, I suppose.

Could you please explain your reasoning around 2, 3, 5 and 6? /Julle (talk) 02:36, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

On ref 2 it does say the Pallas met him for conversation. I can't read it fully as paywalled, but it does look an interview. scope_creep^Talk 06:47, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Agreed. "Much of this is interview material, but not all of it", I wrote above, and then "Mostly an interview, but also covers other material, which I'd argue is secondary" in the comment to the source assessment above. (: /Julle (talk) 11:12, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

The other material is likely provided by the PR agency. It put the reference in the context of a interview and can't be used to prove notability. It not a valid. scope_creep^Talk 13:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

On Ref 5 it reads a profile generated from a press-release. That fact that its bylined doesnt add much to it. It reads like a 300 word profile and is not in-depth. scope_creep^Talk 06:52, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Since we have a press release from exactly the same day (4.), that would mean that they'd sent out two different press releases on the same topic, with different information (since much of the background in 5. is missing in 4.). To me, that seems much more unlikely than a journalist taking a look at the press release in 4. and writing something based on other sources than the press release (since it contains information not in the press release in 4).

(It's still not a longer piece, no.) /Julle (talk) 11:14, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

That looks and reads like conjecture, is not indepth and is not valid. scope_creep^Talk 13:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

On Ref 3. The reference format is fine. This is a financial paper similar to Bloomberg and the Financial Times. Its is likely paid PR. scope_creep^Talk 06:55, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

I'm not intimately familiar with Bloomberg and the Financial Times, but this is the main article in this issue of the newspaper. I find it extremely unlikely that this would be paid PR, that's not how Dagens Industri works and they'd completely resign their position as the dominating financial newspaper in Sweden if they presented paid material as journalism. Why would we assume it's paid PR? /Julle (talk) 11:17, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Because that is mechanism used to market themselves. Billionaires and millionaire are extraordinary secretive, they don't like their business dealing and their private lifes being made pubic, generally speaking. They build a public facade, their brand in the modern era using PR agencies so they are always shown in a good light. That is known thing. Lastly, its not necessarily paid material as journalism. You need to read up on it. All papers take the marketing dollar, more so since the coming of social media when it the industry was absolutely eviscerated, more or less right across the world from about 2007-2008. Its recovered now because many of them are behind paywalls and legislation that has come in to protect the industry but for many years, journalism as a practice was hit very badly. So the boundary between real journalism and all this other "crap" that came in was blurred and they used that money to effectively save their industry. Real journalism is making a return but for certain things like this, you don't know if its paid for. You really have to look, particularly for this type of source. So it could be potentially be a good reference right enough, but its hard to verify and I'm not confident considering the subject matter, that its not been paid for. scope_creep^Talk 13:51, 5 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: If you are proposing redirect, please specify a target. At different times in its history, this page was a redirect to two different targets, neither of which currently mentions the person.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 22:03, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

• Keep. In Sweeden he is more relevant on the media and film industry, but at an internatiional level he is more known for business and political involvements. I recently saw this interview at Swedish main business/financial newspaper Dagens Industri but he talks more about philantropy and politics than business. --Ruccc (talk) 11:11, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

The source analysis has been done and it has no real secondary coverage and interviews can't be used to establish notabilty. scope_creep^Talk 11:44, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I'll address the point above later (the media archive I use to access the sources has been down for a couple of days, and I want to make sure I properly assess everything I say, and not argue to keep just because that's what my evaluating landed in above), but I'd like to point out that there's no agreement in the conversation above that we have a source analysis which reliably shows this. /Julle (talk) 18:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Its a proper analysis and you so far you have not produced a single piece of evidence to prove the man is notable. scope_creep^Talk 22:50, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

• Leaning Redirect[/Merge]: I can't view a number of the sources properly, but what from what I can see there's a dearth of independent sigcov, and I'm not convinced that he has notability outside of Proventus -- which is a pretty bad stub but looks to have sufficient academic coverage to be notable[2][3] -- he didn't found it but looks clearly significant in its activities as its long-time CEO[4]. His TV4 CEO-ship has at least some coverage here - though this was part of Proventus. "Apolitical Academy" is "Höj Rösten [Politikerskola]", which looks to be of limited notability; ditto his foundation. His Executive Production is of questionable notability (he's probably EP because of funding - I've looked at a couple of IMDB listings and he's one of many EPs). I'm ok with redirect and limited coverage at Proventus (mindful of WP:COATRACK and WP:WEIGHT and founder Robert Weil (businessman)) ref WP:NBUSINESSPERSON ("Biographical material on heads and key figures of smaller companies which are themselves the subject of Wikipedia articles are sometimes merged into those articles and the biographies redirected to the company") ^~Hydronium^~Hydroxide^~(Talk)~ 03:54, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

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.