Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrea Schjelderup Dalen


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) —JmaJeremy  ✆  ✎  00:03, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Andrea Schjelderup Dalen

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Article about a hockey player who fails WP:GNG, but PROD was contested on the grounds that she played for the Norwegian national hockey team and passes WP:NHOCKEY. However, a simple google search only shows some stats-sites and some article in the local paper ringblad.no, which means that the article fails WP:GNG. Mentoz86 (talk) 20:23, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Mentoz86 (talk) 20:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Mentoz86 (talk) 20:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ice hockey-related deletion discussions. Mentoz86 (talk) 20:26, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment - Even though this article technically passes WP:NHOCKEY, it should be deleted because there are no significant coverage of the subject in reliable source and fails WP:GNG. Mentoz86 (talk) 20:31, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Passes WP:NHOCKEY by playing on a senior national team. I am not an expert on looking up Norwegian sources, but was able to at least find a number of articles in Ringerikes Blad, which appears to be a reliable source. I am not sure what offline sources exist in Norway, but I think there is enough already to satisfy a presumption of notability. Rlendog (talk) 21:32, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, I know how to look up Norwegian sources, and that's why I nominated this for deletion: all I could find was 4 articles in ringblad.no (Ringerikes Blad), but not what I would call "significant coverage". In fact, one of the four articles are about her team winning Dana Cup at the age of 15. Mentoz86 (talk) 02:11, 24 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - I found a source on the IIHF website that should be reliable. Added to article. Maple Leaf (talk) 23:05, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep per meeting WP:NHOCKEY and sources found by Rlendog. -DJSasso (talk) 11:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The lead of WP:NSPORTS (which NHOCKEY is a part of) says Please note that the failure to meet these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted; conversely, the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept., and further down on the page you can read " In addition, standalone articles are required to meet the General Notability Guideline." And the sources used as reference plus the 4 articles from the local paper Ringerikes Blad is not enough to pass WP:GNG. Mentoz86 (talk) 12:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That is your right to believe that, but I disagree. The sources found by Rlendog and Maple Leaf are enough to meet GNG. All it takes is two references from two different sources that talk about the individual in significant detail to meet GNG. There is no provision in GNG that local sources are not acceptable. Though it is often a common mistake that some people make. -DJSasso (talk) 16:59, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, let's say local sources are as good as any other sources, even though the articles in the local source is only "trivial mentions". But if two different sources is enough, where is the other source? All I can find is a bunch of statistics-pages and nothing else. I'd be happy if there was 1 single source that "address the subject directly in detail", but as a matter of fact, I can't find anything. Mentoz86 (talk) 21:25, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Always met NHOCKEY and now meets GNG.  Patken4 (talk) 21:06, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:NHOCKEY by playing on a senior national team.--Juristicweb (talk) 02:04, 26 August 2012 (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.