Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olle Alsholm

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. There's also a BLPPROD that expires in the next few hours so either way, it's 'delete'. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:35, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Olle Alsholm

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

Lack of notability—I don't think he meets WP:BIO. Google returns 108 hits. A few are reliable sources, but they either just quote him, list him with other members of some group, or, in one case I looked at, attest that STFI made him CEO without saying anything further about him. —Largo Plazo (talk) 22:21, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: If it stays it needs some sources. Handpolk (talk) 22:58, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerly HMSSolent)}|lambast 00:08, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. lavender|^{(formerly HMSSolent)}|lambast 00:09, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I've speedied this unsourced BLP twice. Non-notable and, of course, lacking RS despite that being mentioned as an additional reason when I deleted Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I don't know exactly what the criteria for business leaders look like on enwp, but at least on svwp high offices in large and important companies such as Billerud and Stora (both today part of Stora Enso) combined with membership in one of the Swedish royal academies is certainly more than enough to be considered notable. /FredrikT (talk) 09:12, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I can tell, we don't have notability inherited from one's position in a company. I know we don't have a rule specific to Swedish royal academies. See WP:BIO. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:09, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't know what the criteria are, what weight do you think we should give to your opinion? An article about a living person can be deleted if it doesn't have proper RS references irrespective of the content, and they haven't materialised despite warnings Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:41, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: The article on the Swedish Wikipedia is almost as scanty and devoid of sources. Nha Trang ^Allons! 16:45, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
More inclined to delete - My searches also found nothing to suggest independent notability aside from some of the best results being this (Books) and this (Highbeam) and this (almost the same results as Highbeam). SwisterTwister talk 04:53, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Afd is not a clean-up service. sure the article is in a bad state and unsourced. But is about a notable subject. What this article needs to sources and a clean--up. And AfD is not the right place for that to be asked. Also we dont delete notable articles because of it being of a poor quality at the moment. per WP:GNG.--BabbaQ (talk) 10:06, 14 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

None of the rationales given here for deletion were based on the article's quality. —Largo Plazo (talk) 10:16, 14 June 2015 (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.