Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asger Svendsen

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:46, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Asger Svendsen

[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)

Could find very little through a Google search; no WP:SIGCOV, only passing mentions. Reference on the article's page is a dead link, and an external link is from a primary source (via Wayback Machine) that doesn't look as though it has been updated since about 2008. Doesn't seem to pass WP:MUSICBIO or WP:GNG. ExRat (talk) 22:36, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. ExRat (talk) 22:42, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. ExRat (talk) 22:42, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. ExRat (talk) 23:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:00, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – I found this article about Svendsen in Sydsvenskan that discusses his career at length. However, this is the only piece of significant coverage that I could find. If more sources were found of this quality I would support keeping the article, but as it stands there is not enough coverage to meet general notability. Uffda608 (talk) 11:36, 2 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There's also this somewhat shorter piece from Politiken. Barely passes my interpretation of WP:GNG. /Julle (talk) 21:49, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:MUSICBIO, and WP:SIGCOV. The Politiken link is not to an article, but is a biographical entry. Depending on its context—does the newspaper host some kind of national musical lexicon?—it might help the subject meet criterion 3 of WP:ANYBIO. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 03:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - The text in Politikken is an article. It was published in connection with Svendsen's 70th birthday; thus the "biographical" style. /FredrikT (talk) 08:20, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you for clarifying that. In light of your comment and additional evidence, I'm changing my vote to keep. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 20:10, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:32, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

weak keep: This [1] from 1979 but Google only gives me a snippet view due to copyright. He taught in Sweden for a while, there is some coverage there, [2] With those listed above, we have just barely enough. Oaktree b (talk) 00:27, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete subject fails to meet WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG Vorann Gencov (talk) 10:58, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Clearly non-notable. Only one reference exists, and even then it's a permanent dead link. Haruka Amaranth 14:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
HarukaAmaranth: Did you see the sources mentioned earlier in this discussion? I've now added a couple of them to the article. /Julle (talk) 21:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as it does not meet WP:GNG. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 14:32, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in view of the additional reliable sources coverage identified by Julie and others in this discussion that shows a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 21:31, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is also this, this (chamber recording he was in on Schwann Catalog), and this, in addition to the sources listed above by Uffda608, Julle (and NO!!! It is definitely not a mere biographical entry), and Oaktree b. More than enough to satisfy the wp:gng in my view. Zingarese talk · contribs (please mention me on reply; thanks!) 01:48, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep seems to be just barely over the required source coverage. – Aza24 (talk) 19:30, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 23:23, 15 July 2024 (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.