Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Svante Thunberg (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:12, 29 September 2019 editTyw7 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers25,141 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Latest revision as of 07:11, 3 October 2019 edit undoJo-Jo Eumerus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators95,955 edits →Svante Thunberg: Closed as redirect (XFDcloser) 
(18 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''redirect''' to ]. Based on my reading, the key arguments in favour of deletion are that the subject has no significant coverage by itself, just trivial ones that mainly refer to his relatives, and that the works they appeared in are not significant enough to satisfy ]. The keep arguments point to the reference section, that he's the father of a notable person and assert that the subject has had notable roles in acting and (co-?)authoring a book. There is also a merge argument predicated on the fact that the subject is mostly known for having a notable daughter and could have a place as a section on her article.

On balance, the consensus is in favour of removing the article. It seems like this discussion is seeing an unusually large amount of people rebutting each other's points but the delete camp is much better grounded in policy and guideline:
* Not all things that make a valid reference also prove notability (c.f ]), we generally do not consider having a notable relative as proof of notability, the concern that the acting roles aren't actually significant has not been rebutted.
* Conversely, "per X" arguments are not by default invalid and the fact that the IP which nominated the article for deletion has not logged in does not invalidate their points (also, it seems like nobody was confused by them posting as an IP).
* The discussion on the book is more borderline since apparently the text of the guideline and the way it's applied in practice are not entirely consistent, but it seems like the argument is again leaning towards removal due to e.g concerns that it isn't really a significant book.
* A headcount of 6 keep, 8 delete and 3 merge also endorses the removal of the article, although that is not a consensus in and of itself.

Regarding the merge-or-not arguments there has been a bit of a back-and-forth but a number of examples have been cited of biographies that discuss their subjects' relatives and no policy or guideline to the contrary has been mentioned, so it seems like the discussion is leaning towards merge being allowable. I am not sure what Miraclepine was advocating for - if anything - so I did not consider it.

That leaves only the question of merge-or-delete. The delete argument is more numerous but their stances do not automatically imply that they consider the content totally unusable, while the merge argument makes a case that the content is still usable elsewhere. In my assessment the best way to satisfy both aspects is a redirect, so that the article is removed (thus satisfying most of the delete concerns) but content still available for copying through the history (thus allowing for the merge proposals to work).

PS: I see that there was a previous AFD that was withdrawn despite having received some concurring opinions; I've reformatted that close as the {{tl|hab}}/{{tl|hat}} method does not work at AFD and didn't do anything about the procedural irregularity as this second deletion discussion was ongoing by that time. ] (], ]) 07:11, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
===]=== ===]===
{{not a vote}} {{not a vote}}
{{Notice|Please don't use ] when casting your votes. It gets confused with the formatting of this nomination}} {{Notice|Please don't use ] when casting your votes. It gets confused with the formatting of this nomination}}

{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|B}}
<div class="infobox" style="width:33%">AfDs for this article:<ul class="listify">{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Svante Thunberg}}</ul></div> <div class="infobox" style="width:33%">AfDs for this article:<ul class="listify">{{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Svante Thunberg}}</ul></div>
<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude> <noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>
Line 107: Line 126:
**We should treat two IPs as two separate individuals. ♫ ] ] ] 17:26, 26 September 2019 (UTC) **We should treat two IPs as two separate individuals. ♫ ] ] ] 17:26, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
***'''Additional comment''', as per Banana Republic just below me, he is ALSO notable as the co-author of this book. And he is famous because of his relationship to his daughter, perhaps not among Swedish people, who are int he ebst position to judge his pre-Greta's fame notability. I had heard of him through reading a number of what would be considered reliable sources simply reading articles about Greta, so for me his notability is absolutely linked-in to his daughter. ♫ ] ] ] 17:29, 26 September 2019 (UTC) ***'''Additional comment''', as per Banana Republic just below me, he is ALSO notable as the co-author of this book. And he is famous because of his relationship to his daughter, perhaps not among Swedish people, who are int he ebst position to judge his pre-Greta's fame notability. I had heard of him through reading a number of what would be considered reliable sources simply reading articles about Greta, so for me his notability is absolutely linked-in to his daughter. ♫ ] ] ] 17:29, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
*] --{{unsigned|Miraclepine|16:26, September 29, 2019}} *] <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 16:26, September 29, 2019 (UTC)</small>
**Note that the "minuscule line" containing the co-author's name is the exact same font size as the book title. ] (]) 16:56, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
***It's not. I compared the capital "S"'s in Photoshop and the font size used for the title is 30% larger than it is for Svante's name. Not that I think this matters that much to anybody who actually clicked through and checked the picture. ] (]) 10:12, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
******I'll take your word for it. The 30% difference was not perceptible to my eyes relative to the monster font used for the wife's name. The point is -- the size of the font does not matter, as it's not an indication of level of contribution. ] (]) 15:42, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
*******"This is really getting surreal -- talking about the size of the font on the book cover is intellectually equivalent to talking about the size of his dick." If you don't want to argue about the font size, don't make incorrect statements about it and there won't be any need for anybody to correct you. Also please read up on ].] (]) 00:30, 2 October 2019 (UTC)
****Also, I don't know if this is the place to raise this, but Banana Republic, I think you should make an effort to use less aggressive summary edits. I'm thinking of "Add your comments as a comment, not in the form of a biased unsigned caption with the bullshit of "The minuscule line below"" & "Are we going to also talk about the size of his dick?" . There's no need for strong language, we're just discussing the notability of a certain person, and it's alright to disagree. ] (]) 10:49, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
*'''Keep''': While the subject of this biography clearly fails ] for his acting career, he seems to pass ] for co-authoring the book ]. ] (]) 16:44, 26 September 2019 (UTC) *'''Keep''': While the subject of this biography clearly fails ] for his acting career, he seems to pass ] for co-authoring the book ]. ] (]) 16:44, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
**In my experience, passing WP:AUTHOR usually requires at least two books with multiple published reviews. In cases where there is only one book, we usually either delete or (if the book is notable itself) redirect to an article about the book. —] (]) 18:33, 26 September 2019 (UTC) **In my experience, passing WP:AUTHOR usually requires at least two books with multiple published reviews. In cases where there is only one book, we usually either delete or (if the book is notable itself) redirect to an article about the book. —] (]) 18:33, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Line 132: Line 156:
*****Show me the relevant policy or guideline or I'm not buying it. If OR has no place in an article it has no place in an argument in an Afd either. Not a reason to revert of course as people are entitled to their say but not a relevant comment either and so should be ignored by the closer. ♫ ] ] ] 17:12, 28 September 2019 (UTC) *****Show me the relevant policy or guideline or I'm not buying it. If OR has no place in an article it has no place in an argument in an Afd either. Not a reason to revert of course as people are entitled to their say but not a relevant comment either and so should be ignored by the closer. ♫ ] ] ] 17:12, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
***The size of the font does not matter. He is a coauthor of the book, and passes ] criteria #3 which states "''{{tquote|The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work}}''". ] (]) 20:22, 27 September 2019 (UTC) ***The size of the font does not matter. He is a coauthor of the book, and passes ] criteria #3 which states "''{{tquote|The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work}}''". ] (]) 20:22, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
****Richard - I really don't see how it could possibly be "own research" to describe the cover of the book (and like David said, it's apparently irrelevant either way). BananaRepublic - you've got to realize it's quite a stretch to claim Thunberg meets ] based on the co-authorship of a single book only published in Swedish and German, where the author's name was essentially a foot note in the original Swedish edition, and in the German edition, one of four, not two, co-authors. ], Svante's and Malena's other daughter, also passes ] based on the co-authorship then, which is equally bizarre as Svante having his own article. Either way, he still fails ] (as does Beata), so this whole discussion seems irrelevant. ] (]) 10:38, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
*****I do not necessarily agree with the claim that ''{{tquote|the author's name was essentially a foot note in the original Swedish edition}}''. I don't know how they decided to design the book's cover, but I suspect that they made the name of the wife in huge font because it's a book about her life, not necessarily because she contributed 10 times more to the book (or whatever factor the font size for the wife's name is relative to the font use for the husband's name). ] (]) 15:42, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
*'''Merge''' to ], until sufficient material is added to spin off a separate article, per ], ], etc. Pretty close to keep, per Andy Dingley. <small>Would I like to be ] about my !vote? No. No, thank you.</small> --] (]) 19:39, 26 September 2019 (UTC) *'''Merge''' to ], until sufficient material is added to spin off a separate article, per ], ], etc. Pretty close to keep, per Andy Dingley. <small>Would I like to be ] about my !vote? No. No, thank you.</small> --] (]) 19:39, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
*: Again, this is not an article about Greta Thunberg. Again editors seems confused, merging Greta and Svante as one person.Merging this article into Greta article is not an option at this point. May I again repeat to everyone that this is not a !vote on Greta Thunberg.] (]) 20:06, 26 September 2019 (UTC) *: Again, this is not an article about Greta Thunberg. Again editors seems confused, merging Greta and Svante as one person.Merging this article into Greta article is not an option at this point. May I again repeat to everyone that this is not a !vote on Greta Thunberg.] (]) 20:06, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Line 143: Line 169:
**Those are all arguments from ]. —] (]) 19:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC) **Those are all arguments from ]. —] (]) 19:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
* "managed by" is not an inheritance criterion such as "sired by". Neither is "a cause that is probably the most notable one of the current era". If managing the 16-year-old generator of a global movement critical to the survival of all inhabitants of the planet is not notable, it is hard to imagine what is. I will close with a quote from your WP user page, David: ''"Misplaced Pages editor (n.) Someone who will not leave a burning building until you show them the newspaper article documenting how many people were killed by the fire."'' --] (]) 15:15, 29 September 2019 (UTC) * "managed by" is not an inheritance criterion such as "sired by". Neither is "a cause that is probably the most notable one of the current era". If managing the 16-year-old generator of a global movement critical to the survival of all inhabitants of the planet is not notable, it is hard to imagine what is. I will close with a quote from your WP user page, David: ''"Misplaced Pages editor (n.) Someone who will not leave a burning building until you show them the newspaper article documenting how many people were killed by the fire."'' --] (]) 15:15, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

<s>'''Keep''', notable person, and notable daughter as well, worthy of inclusion. ] (]) 19:55, 28 September 2019 (UTC)</s> <s>'''Keep''', notable person, and notable daughter as well, worthy of inclusion. ] (]) 19:55, 28 September 2019 (UTC)</s>
:{{u|Davidgoodheart}}, how is he notable? As the IP pointed above, there are no sources that would prove Svante is notable. Also, notability is NOT ]. --] (]) — If (reply) then (]) 20:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC) :{{u|Davidgoodheart}}, how is he notable? As the IP pointed above, there are no sources that would prove Svante is notable. Also, notability is NOT ]. --] (]) — If (reply) then (]) 20:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
::{{u|Tyw7}}, Point well made, thanks for pointed that out. ::{{u|Tyw7}}, Point well made, thanks for pointed that out.
*'''Merge''', with ] as not independently notable. Would make a good section on his daughters article. ] (]) 20:13, 28 September 2019 (UTC) *'''Merge''', with ] as not independently notable. Would make a good section on his daughters article. ] (]) 20:13, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
*'''Delete''',Fails ] ,if someone"s relatives are notable that does not count for himself. ] (]) 12:37, 29 September 2019 (UTC) *'''Delete''', Fails ] ,if someone"s relatives are notable that does not count for himself. ] (]) 12:37, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
*'''Comment''' - I see a lot of Greta, Greta, Greta, this is not an article about Greta Thunberg. A merge of this article into Greta Thunbergs article would be inappropriate. He also covers WP:AUTHOR’s criteria 3. ] (]) 08:43, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
**Please stop ]ing. You already !voted keep. Ergo, you oppose delete and merge. All you're doing is repeating yourself. If the comments favoring merge had changed your mind, you would have changed your !vote. Since you didn't, everyone can infer that you oppose merging. Posting yet another comment repeating that fills up the page with noise. Have a little faith that everyone heard the first time. --] (]) 04:20, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
*** You literally called me a Dick above in this discussion. If you want to go referring to bludgeoning. Secondly this is not a !vote and it literally stands in tiles. Thirdly this discussion will likely be closed soon and whatever result will be fine. ] (]) 06:16, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
*'''Merge''' with ].] (]) 03:13, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
{{clear}}
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>

Latest revision as of 07:11, 3 October 2019

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 redirect to Greta Thunberg. Based on my reading, the key arguments in favour of deletion are that the subject has no significant coverage by itself, just trivial ones that mainly refer to his relatives, and that the works they appeared in are not significant enough to satisfy WP:NACTOR. The keep arguments point to the reference section, that he's the father of a notable person and assert that the subject has had notable roles in acting and (co-?)authoring a book. There is also a merge argument predicated on the fact that the subject is mostly known for having a notable daughter and could have a place as a section on her article.

On balance, the consensus is in favour of removing the article. It seems like this discussion is seeing an unusually large amount of people rebutting each other's points but the delete camp is much better grounded in policy and guideline:

  • Not all things that make a valid reference also prove notability (c.f WP:SIGCOV), we generally do not consider having a notable relative as proof of notability, the concern that the acting roles aren't actually significant has not been rebutted.
  • Conversely, "per X" arguments are not by default invalid and the fact that the IP which nominated the article for deletion has not logged in does not invalidate their points (also, it seems like nobody was confused by them posting as an IP).
  • The discussion on the book is more borderline since apparently the text of the guideline and the way it's applied in practice are not entirely consistent, but it seems like the argument is again leaning towards removal due to e.g concerns that it isn't really a significant book.
  • A headcount of 6 keep, 8 delete and 3 merge also endorses the removal of the article, although that is not a consensus in and of itself.

Regarding the merge-or-not arguments there has been a bit of a back-and-forth but a number of examples have been cited of biographies that discuss their subjects' relatives and no policy or guideline to the contrary has been mentioned, so it seems like the discussion is leaning towards merge being allowable. I am not sure what Miraclepine was advocating for - if anything - so I did not consider it.

That leaves only the question of merge-or-delete. The delete argument is more numerous but their stances do not automatically imply that they consider the content totally unusable, while the merge argument makes a case that the content is still usable elsewhere. In my assessment the best way to satisfy both aspects is a redirect, so that the article is removed (thus satisfying most of the delete concerns) but content still available for copying through the history (thus allowing for the merge proposals to work).

PS: I see that there was a previous AFD that was withdrawn despite having received some concurring opinions; I've reformatted that close as the {{hab}}/{{hat}} method does not work at AFD and didn't do anything about the procedural irregularity as this second deletion discussion was ongoing by that time. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 07:11, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Svante Thunberg

Not a voteIf you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Misplaced Pages contributors. Misplaced Pages has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.
Please don't use reply-link when casting your votes. It gets confused with the formatting of this nomination
AfDs for this article:

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Svante Thunberg (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

AFD nominated on behalf of 110.165.186.42 --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:24, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Per WP:AFDHOWTO, I'm requesting help with nominating the Svante Thunberg article for deletion (since I don't use an acccount).

My motivation for the nomination is that this article seems to fail the basic criteria. There doesn't seem to be any significant non-trivial coverage of Thunberg. I checked on the Swedish Misplaced Pages page and even there, all the links are just "databases" proving he's appeared in this or that stage show/movie/TV show, or articles about either his wife or daughter (both who are clearly notable). He's appeared in some productions but it's not clear to me that the roles he played in them were "significant" (per WP:NACTOR). I tried looking him up on Google and while I get hits for several news articles where his name appears even before Greta became famous, they all seem to be trivial mentions as "Malena Ernman's husband"). A google news search for

"svante thunberg" -"greta" -"malena"

receives 1 casual mention of another man sharing his name/surname complaining about traffic noise in Stockholm. ()

A google search for

"svante thunberg är" or "svane thunberg har" (i.e. "... is" "... has") -"greta" -"malena"

receives two mentions of other people sharing the same name, one inventor, another unclear, no mention whatsoever of acting.110.165.186.42 (talk) 08:35, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

I also want to add that this nomination isn't about trying to "get to Greta" so I hope everyone will keep a cool head. Greta and her mother Malena are obviously notable, but I don't see a case for Svante's notability and I've made a good effort to find any evidence that he might actually be, but failed..110.165.186.42 (talk) 08:40, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Note: This article had previously been nominated by User:Andy_Dingley acting on behalf of 110.165.186.42, but Andy withdrew his nomination.

I have copied some of the IP's comment from the old nomination:

  • Comment The sources in the article are currently as follows:

1) An article about his daughter where there's a trivial mention of him and his wife becoming vegans because of her. Not significant. Trivial.

2) an article about his daughter which mentions in one line her father was with her on the trans-Atlantic boat trip. Not significant. Trivial.

3) and 4) are from the Swedish population registry. Obviously trivial.

5) is a database of the imdb type, but for Swedish theatre "Dramaten", showing Thunberg has appeared in 3 2 plays, in one as as an extra and a choir member, and once as a character called "Ettan" in Peter Pan (unclear which character this is, but most likely not a major one. No mention of a character called "Ettan" in the Swedish Peter Pan Wiki article). Judging from this source, he does certainly not seem to have ever be an established theatre actor.

6) is a newspaper article not available online and unverified, with the title: "Åtta av 567 fick chansen", "Eight out of 567 people got the oppurtunity". It seems to have been an article mentioning he was one of few accepted either to Gothenburg university or Dramaten. Trivial.

7) 8) 9) Imdb and Imdb type entries without any further comment or text on the actor whatsoever. Trivial

10) 11) interviews with Thunberg's wife where he is mentioned several times. His wife (Malena) talks about her home life and mentions how her husband gave up his career to take care of the children while she's on tour (as an opera singer). The most signifcant coverage of the bunch, but still entirely in relation to his wife, and certainly not evidence he had a notable career as an actor.

12) Review (published in a Swedish newspaper) of the book he wrote with his wife and daughter. One mention of his "character" in the book, no further mentioning of him. It should be obvious that as it currently stands, the article does most definitely not meet WP:GNG and especially not WP:NACTOR or WP:AUTHOR.110.165.186.42 (talk) 13:12, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

--Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:26, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:24, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:24, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Comment @Ohnoitsjamie and BabbaQ: notifying voters in the old AFD. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:30, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 18:34, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:39, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 18:39, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Are you going to make an argument countering the IP's careful analyses showing all of the references in your link to have only trivial coverage of Svante? I should also note that your previous withdrawal of the first AfD was out of process: AfDs can only be withdrawn when there are no opinions concurring with the request for deletion, and that one had two. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:26, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
J 1982 edited their comment to add this to an existing line: "combined with his appearance in television series Skärgårdsdoktorn". Thunberg appeared in a single episode of a soap opera. This hardly helps him pass the bar for WP:NACTOR. J 1982 should also address the fact that having appeared in 2 plays on Dramaten in 1991 is not the same thing as being an "actor performing at what is often referred to as the 'Swedish national theatre stage'"110.165.185.203 (talk) 16:13, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
How come another IP just randomly turn up and add a comment. Stay with one IP if you can not bother to start an account. J1982s rationale for Keep is based Thunbergs work which is a part of the sourcing. Totally acceptable. BabbaQ (talk) 16:34, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
"Stay with one IP" is a meaningless exhortation. I'm not using several IP's - the one I use changes automatically from time to time, outside of my control. Besides, my new IP is almost identical to the previous one, except for the last few numbers. It's a complete non-issue. Don't attempt to make it into one. Let's discuss Svante's notability. "J1982s rationale for Keep is based Thunbergs work which is a part of the sourcing". I've gone through the sources with a comb and presented the results of that in a comment. There is just no non-trivial significant coverage of him and his acting career does obviously not meet WP:NACTOR. I've proven this with actual references to each individual source quoted in the article, while you've only made vague references to "it's in the sources", so far. 110.165.185.203 (talk) 00:24, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete unless multiple new reliable sources turn up with significantly greater in-depth coverage of Svante himself than the ones analyzed in the nomination. I tried looking myself but didn't find them, presumably because (if they exist at all) they're hidden by all the articles about his notable relatives mentioning but not going into depth about him. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:51, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
    • Alternatively, redirection to Scenes from the Heart would also be acceptable, if the article on the book is improved to use enough third-party sources to make its own notability clear. (I suspect the book is notable but the article on it in its current state does not reflect that.) Despite a lot of heat on this AfD, it still is the case that nobody here has provided evidence for Svante having separate notability from the book or other family members. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:48, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Keep - article subject has an established career in the field of acting with plenty of notable roles. Provided in sources. Also per WP:GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 11:01, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
    BabbaQ, IP has said that his theater's role are not notable and he hasn't won any awards so WP:NACTOR cannot be used here. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 11:52, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
    "plenty of notable roles" - what do you base this on? Obviously not the actual sources in the article. Please name some of these notable roles!110.165.185.203 (talk) 15:51, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Delete No reliable sources for notability. Keep votes seem only to be based on the personal opinions of those editors. Known to the general public only through wife & daughter. With the enormous coverage given to his daughter at this time, it's especially and principally important that her father isn't baselessly name-dropped into English Misplaced Pages with an article of his own. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 12:46, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment - This is not a !vote on Greta Thunberg. If Svante is mentioned in the same sources as Greta or not is completely irrelevant. Its POV at best and must be given little weight at closing.BabbaQ (talk) 12:59, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
I, for one, do not know what is meant by this comment, finding nothing here about that (Svante is mentioned in the same sources as Greta) which would impact on this deletion. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:03, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
Svante Thunberg is currently 239 words long. Given redundancies, not all of that would even be merged. Here is a sample of featured articles that have more than 300 words describing the subject's relatives: Lisa del Giocondo, W. E. B. Du Bois, Emmeline Pankhurst, Marjory Stoneman Douglas, Kate Sheppard, Josephine Butler, Macfarlane Burnet. Etcetera. These are biographies of long lives; in a very young person's bio parents will play an even larger proportionate role.

RE: "Again editors seems confused, merging Greta and Svante as one person." Don't be a dick. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 22:45, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

BabbaQ, on the contrary, merge is definitely an option. See Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/Common_outcomes#Celebrities. That said, Dennis, I think it's unfair to say you don't want to be "sealioned". AfD's are supposed to be discussions, as I understand it. It feels weird to me then that you state you are essentially not interested in discussing your vote.110.165.185.203 (talk) 01:46, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
The pattern of haranguing an editor as to whether or not they really meant what they said is tiresome and unproductive. The need to bat away uncharitable misinterpretations of our words, like we don't understand the father and daughter are two different people, is exhausting, and it annoys everyone trying to read the discussion for the purpose of getting on with building an encyclopedia. The kind of back and forth that generates doesn't move an AfD towards its ultimate outcome, or help anyone decide what option they support. It bloats the discussion with no benefit. It doesn't help the closer make their decision. It wastes everyone's time.

It's helpful to reply to a !vote if your reply contains information that isn't already present on the page. If you're repeating arguments that were stated above the !vote, you're sealioning. The editor can be presumed to have read those arguments, and if they chose the opposite option, it's tacitly clear that they found those arguments unconvincing. Nobody needs to check back to be sure they're sure that they're sure they were unconvinced. Take the hint. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:09, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Persons should not be merged. And article length shall not decide. Even if the Greta Thunberg article just consisted of a few words, it should be accepted. J 1982 (talk) 08:36, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
They should not be merged without justification. If we go for delete there is plenty of justification here as we often go into some detail about people's unnotable parents. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 17:15, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
  • Strong keep Notable daughter who is managed by notable father for a cause that is probably the most notable one of the current era. --User:Harnad (talk) 18:45, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
  • "managed by" is not an inheritance criterion such as "sired by". Neither is "a cause that is probably the most notable one of the current era". If managing the 16-year-old generator of a global movement critical to the survival of all inhabitants of the planet is not notable, it is hard to imagine what is. I will close with a quote from your WP user page, David: "Misplaced Pages editor (n.) Someone who will not leave a burning building until you show them the newspaper article documenting how many people were killed by the fire." --User:Harnad (talk) 15:15, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Keep, notable person, and notable daughter as well, worthy of inclusion. Davidgoodheart (talk) 19:55, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Davidgoodheart, how is he notable? As the IP pointed above, there are no sources that would prove Svante is notable. Also, notability is NOT WP:INHERITED. --Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 20:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC)
Tyw7, Point well made, thanks for pointed that out.
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.