Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ake S. Dahlgren


 * 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   -- Cirt (talk) 00:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC) delete. -- Cirt (talk) 00:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Ake S. Dahlgren

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No reliable evidence that he is indeed the father of nutricosmetics, nor that he is notable according to Wikipedia guidelines including WP:ACADEMIC. Online reference given doesn't mention him, making this essentially an unsourced biography. Can find no cites for him in Google Scholar, and no significant coverage on him online in WP:Reliable sources. Prod contested by creator. Nanodance (talk) 09:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  —Nanodance (talk) 09:51, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. As Tomas e points out on Talk:Ake S. Dahlgren, there is no evidence in LIBRIS, the Swedish national union catalogue, of any publications by an Åke Dahlgren with matching birth and death years, let alone any doctoral dissertation or anything in any seemingly relevant field. ("Ake" is not a Swedish name, and no author named Ake Dahlgren can be found.) It looks suspiciously like a hoax. --Hegvald (talk) 10:28, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of reliable sources. Xxanthippe (talk) 10:42, 8 September 2010 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.  —Hegvald (talk) 05:54, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions.  —Hegvald (talk) 05:54, 9 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Weak delete. After turning up the phrase "Professor Ake Dahlgren the renowned Swedish-Swiss scientist and expert on gerontology and his son Dr Atti-La Dahlgren" in a product description, I found some other mentions without the "S,", in particular this, which although from the New Straits Times appears to be an advertising article. Nothing that reliably establishes notability; the son has a wider trail of publications, though that could be recentism in search results/computer records of papers. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:22, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:Notability and obvious SEO attempt.  EnabledDanger (talk) 21:14, 9 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I think this may be a re-creation of a previously deleted article. Looking at the contributions of User:Mediascience, who created it on 31 August 2010, I found Imedeen, which was created by User:Medialog on 6 May 2009. User:Medialog shows no edits since 12 June 2009 but their talk page shows a speedy deletion nomination of Ake Dahlgren on 4 June 2009; here is the log entry showing it was deleted. The redirect currently there was created by User:Tomas e on 1 September 2010. If they are substantially the same, then maybe this should be wrapped up fast. Otherwise, Imedeen should be linked, and probably added to this AfD. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It was an A7 speedy deletion, but only items that have had a full deletion discussion can be deleted for being a recreation of deleted material. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nothing of any significance in Google scholar by or about him (there may be nothing at all, it's hard to tell because there are several other Ake Dahlgrens). To me this seems like commercial cosmetics spamcruft masquerading as academics. Clear fail of WP:PROF and WP:V. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:58, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. I actually don't think it's an outright hoax, but probably a non-notable inventor or engineer who got his credentials exaggerated into being a professor who founded a new field, nutricosmetics, to make some sort of cosmetics/health product commercial sound better. Probably that article should receive closer scrutiny as well. Tomas e (talk) 14:51, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 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.