Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dag Kjartan Bjerketvedt
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 delete. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:24, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Dag Kjartan Bjerketvedt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject of this unsourced BLP. Also, do not believe this academic meets PROF. J04n(talk page) 21:40, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 02:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Appears to meet WP:Prof#C6 if the institution is good enough. Xxanthippe (talk) 03:45, 27 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]
- Comment It probably needs someone with a clear understanding of the Norwegian academic system to confirm, but the page on Telemark University College doesn't indicate that it is a "major academic institution" in that country. AllyD (talk) 18:26, 27 June 2011 (UTC) See also the article describing the University college (Scandinavia) sector. AllyD (talk) 19:51, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 04:06, 4 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete on the basis that the individual's jobs do not meet WP:PROF; his period on the board of [Forskerforbundet] might be an alternative but that organisation has no article on the English Wikipedia. AllyD (talk) 07:06, 4 July 2011 (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.