Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ellen Kristin Dahl-Pedersen


 * 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   delete. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 19:04, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Ellen Kristin Dahl-Pedersen

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Apparently non-notable author. She has written a few books as a coauthor, but there is no evidence of her, or her books, receiving significant coverage as outlined at WP:N. The article notes that there was a press conference anouncing the release of the book. I don't see how calling such a press conference amounts to notability as defined in Wikipedia guidelines. There are also serious WP:BLP problems, (check the article history), as the article is being used as a WP:COATRACK to air allegations about the death of a relative. Jayron  32  17:46, 11 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete: As Jayron32 says, not sufficiently notable, and an obvious coatrack. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:52, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: Very few sources. A case of WP:BLP1E and WP:COATRACK. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 17:58, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: I created the article, and never in that intention... There are no allegations in the article now, and as seen in the article's history, I've been the main contributer. &#91;Pointer to this source &#93;. Just so you know, NRK just broadcasted a segment solely centered around Dahl-Pedersen. Second: I've removed all information regarding &#91;the BLP problem alluded to&#93; to prove notability and non-bias. --TIAYN (talk) 18:23, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * [Redacted per the Biographies of living persons policy. Stick to discussion of the subject and the sources for this biography article. Uncle G (talk) 09:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)]
 * Delete - not wiki noteworthy, clear coatracking BLP issues, speedy would be better. Off2riorob (talk) 18:04, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * delete per above, I tried tagging it for speedy but the tag was removed. Finn Rindahl (talk) 18:22, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, with the possibility of re-creation. [Redacted per the Biographies of living persons policy. Stick to discussion of the subject and the sources for this biography article, MikeNicho231. Uncle G (talk) 09:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)]    MikeNicho231 (talk) 20:57, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * COMMENT: Now, isn't this odd? Here we try to get an article deleted for bringing up rumors and speculations that far exceeeds what facts police so far have released. Trying to "save the article", the assumptions and rumours are taken out of the article, and then deletion discussion runs on - and nobody really understands why the article should be deleted... Until MikeNicho here paste the same bucket of rumours here so we know. [Redacted per the Biographies of living persons policy. Stick to discussion of the subject and the sources for this biography article. Uncle G (talk) 09:43, 12 December 2010 (UTC)] Till then namedropping and wild guessing should be avoided. TorSch (talk) 00:23, 12 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- &mdash;innotata 21:31, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: As this article is now, this is just a discussion on whether or not she meets the notability-criterion as an author. Well& good, if kept we need to delete previous revisions of the article where the emphasis was on unfounded gossiping. Finn Rindahl (talk) 12:36, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, not quite enough notability as an author as far as I can see. Geschichte (talk) 16:44, 15 December 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.