Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian Lorentzen


 * 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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz Read! Talk! 22:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Christian Lorentzen

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

The individual fails WP:NBASIC and WP:GNG; there are not multiple independent reliable sources that cover him significantly. The references currently in the article include a bio blurb from his employer (cited twice), a writing of his in the London Review of Books, an article that does not so much as mention his name, an advertisement for an essay collection he put together, and a YouTube video from "Bloggingheads.tv". No such references contribute towards WP:GNG, as they fail WP:INDEPENDENT, WP:RS, and/or fail to provide significant coverage of the individual. An online search for significant coverage of this individual yielded this NY Times piece on a play he participated in (though it really doesn't provide any significant coverage of him other than quoting him and indicating that he took a sip of a drink), and a handful of pieces that briefly quote him. He's written in a lot of places, but there isn't really enough coverage of him to meet WP:NBASIC and/or WP:GNG, so the article should be deleted as non-notable. — Mhawk10 (talk) 21:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Authors, Journalism, Literature, News media,  and Entertainment. — Mhawk10 (talk) 21:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete this is the kind of article I hate to see deleted because it will be writable eventually, but for now it's not and so we can't write it. For future reference, there's a critical profile here, and a symposium here on his well known Harper's article, there's also his involvement in the hipster kerfuffle stemming from his TimeOut New York article (discussed, e.g. here), and there's routine coverage of his moves from one publication to another, but I think we're awaiting a couple more long profiles before we can have an article. He's been associated with enough different publications that I don't think any one publication makes sense for a redirect.--Jahaza (talk) 06:50, 27 April 2022 (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.