Talk:Svante Thunberg

The "daughters' diagnoses"?
Do both daughters have more than one diagnosis, or is this just Swenglish? Possibly 2 typos? Clarity tag added. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 06:19, 4 May 2019 (UTC)

Deletion discussion?
Where is it, as per huge tag? Btw he sure has been engaged a lot. Only married one of them I guess. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete minor accomplishments not even listed in cast rosters in WP articles. Possibly a sentence or two abiut him could be added to wife's article. Being related to her & daughter is not enough. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:22, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Strong keep He is notable on own merits. J 1982 (talk) 18:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete as I placed the PROD tag I clearly disagree that he is notable though I am pleased to see the article is improving, which is the primary aim of any PROD., it's no good just saying he is notable, you need to explain why he is notable, basing yourself on WP:notability, our notability guideline, and remembering he is a living person so the notability standard needs setting high. The fact that he has a notable father, wife and daughter does not make him notable. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 18:25, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - Poor Svante, only mistake being the father of Greta so he suddenly get a lot of attention. Clearly notable per acting career WP:GNG. We don’t go after POV like ”minor accomplishments”. He is an actor who has had several notable roles within theater and TV. BabbaQ (talk) 05:20, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Mistake? Huge benefit I would say. Tons of publicity & his own WP article. If his accomplishments have been minor so far, he's not notable. If they are major or substantial, he is. Not for me to decide that, but for reliable sources. I haven't seen anything impressive so far (except that he's Malenas's husband & Greta's father). Maybe more to come? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 13:04, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

This discussion has no meaning. If editors want to delete this article they need to start an Afd.--Obi2canibe (talk) 13:48, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Indeed.  Schwede 66  19:38, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * It does have meaning in testing the waters to see if an Afd is necessary, hardly unusual to have these kind of informal surveys. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 10:52, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

PROD
Anyone can remove the PROD, reverting the removal is not acceptable. An WP:AFD is the route to go down now, IMO. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 11:19, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * To me, an edit summary like "given the article exists in three other languages" is even less acceptable as the only reason given when removing a PROD. Since when did we start finding such arguments relevant? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:59, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * You might want to read up on WP:DEPROD. Anybody can do so for any reason. What I'm saying is that the potential deletion of this article needs discussion and WP:AfD is the appropriate venue for that; the PROD process is not.  Schwede 66  19:35, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * What, may I ask, is the intelligible reason to add a PROD template? I'm willing to learn more about what looks like nonsense. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:16, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * "PROD must only be used if no opposition to the deletion is expected." - ??? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:19, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Looking at the extremely over-blown and ever-swelling proportions of our article about his daughter, how could anyone here ever assume that there would not be opposition to deleting this article about her daddy? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:22, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
 * A PROD is two-fold; to improve the article or delete it if nobody opposes. In fact you don't need to give any reason to remove the PROD, merely oppose deletion through this method. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 15:11, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I had no idea whether there would be opposition or not but do think it is important to assume good faith ie that editors will express views based on Wikipedia rather than our feelings concerning the Thunberg phenomenon. I sometimes place PRODS even when I think there will be opposition, both to see if the article will be improved and to test other editors feelings on the article. In this case someone opposed the PROD but we can still go to WP:AFD. I haven't read any of the refs so am not currently sure whether notability has been established since the article was PRODed but it certainly looks to have been improved. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 15:15, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'm ever learning what to do & what not to do. Aren't we all? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:29, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Some of us have more experience here but sure, the day I stop learnign I'll stop editing. ♫ RichardWeiss talk contribs 15:31, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

name?
The article says "was born Svante Fritz Vilhelm Ernman Thunberg" - this would be an amazing coincidence that his birth name contained "Ernman" which is his wife's birth name too. The verification does not match what is written in the Swedish version of the article. Can someone who reads Swedish verify this claim as fact or fiction? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.115.204.102 (talk) 03:47, 15 August 2019 (UTC)
 * - good catch! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 14:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Notable or non-notable activiy?
I do not believe that this reversal is constructive. Activities may be "well-known", but that does not mean they are notable, or are anything other than filler to try to make the whole notability-wise dubious article (see above here) look more substantial. I will revert this again soon, unless some uninvolved editor thinks that the famous daughter's coattails are sufficient to make things she's done accompanied by daddy notable in regard to him. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:26, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

I certainly would be nice ...
... if we could be spared this type of personally belligerent and accusatory edit summaries. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 20:29, 25 August 2019 (UTC)

AfD nomination
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 Wikipedia 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)
 * For what it is worth, I read the entire talk page, read the article, perused sources, and concur with IP user. The subject of this BLP is not notable. I will try to return here tomorrow and initiate the AfD process if I can make time from my off-Wikipedia life. Thank you for your work, IP user.--FeralOink (talk) 12:46, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see that the AfD process has already been initiated. It is ongoing, for a week, I believe.--FeralOink (talk) 12:49, 27 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Feel free to add your vote to the AfD as well.2001:240:2409:D0C1:C101:A261:F9E:3773 (talk) 11:03, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

El Español source
Somebody inserted a Spanish-language source (ElEspanol.com) as evidence that Svante Thunberg joined Riksteatern, but this is an obvious case of WP:CITOGENESIS. The article is a week old and is obviously based on what was in this (or the Spanish-language version) of this article. The link should be removed. I would do it myself but the article is protected and I don't have an account. It's also not really contested that he joined Riksteatern so I don't think the reference is even needed. 2001:240:2409:D0C1:C101:A261:F9E:3773 (talk) 11:03, 1 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The article even cites it got its information from Wikipedia, was able to confuse Dramaten and Riksteatern (it's Dramaten and not Riksteatern that is " el apelativo con el que se conoce a la compañía nacional de teatro sueca") and they also only refer to it by a misspelled version of the nickname "Riks" - "(los) Ricks". This article should never have been added as a source in the first place.2001:240:2409:D0C1:C101:A261:F9E:3773 (talk) 11:19, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Did you know? nomination

 * Frankly, who cares about anything like that, about anyone? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:19, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Nominator has now drawn h own fantasy picture of Thunberg and uploaded it to Commons in another attempt to push this through. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:49, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * , you are welcome to call it a fantasy. Moonraker (talk) 10:46, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Photos of wife & daughter
Photos of wife and daughter in the article without any photo of subject. Reason (see edit summary): 2There is also a rule that an image offered for DYK needs to be in the article". Where is that rule? And what is this, just a Malena promo by Wikipedia? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 04:43, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Update: photo of subject now added, non-free, from a copyrighted video. Reason: "for identification and critical commentary on the video and its contents" - what commentary on what video? --SergeWoodzing (talk) 04:47, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * That rule is at Did you know, point 6. You are misquoting from the upload, but I see you have arranged to have it deleted, so end of story, I think, . Moonraker (talk) 09:05, 15 January 2023 (UTC)