Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helena Ekblom


 * 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. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:26, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Helena Ekblom

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet Notability requirements. ReformedArsenal (talk) 23:03, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * What is the reason to why the article is contested? The relevance is I think described in the article. She was one of the most well known religious figures of her category in contemporary Sweden, and she still is so in Swedish history. If the references are questioned, then the article should not be deleted, but rather have its references approved, just as articles are always improved continuously in Wikipedia. Foreign language sources are allowed in Wikipedia. Ekblom is quite notable in Swedish history. She is as mentioned the perhaps most notable of all female preachers in her category in Swedish history. Of course the article can be developed, though, as can all articles. She is well referenced on Swedish wikipedia. This article should be improved, not deleted. --Aciram (talk) 23:48, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

I was not able to find any published secondary sources that qualified for notability per Wikipedia:Notability (People)ReformedArsenal (talk) 00:22, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, at least the first and the second sources in the article are reliable and independent, though for the first one it would be good to have the publishing information (publisher, year, page etc).--Ymblanter (talk) 07:41, 18 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - The subject is notable, as I mention before and any one with knowledge of the subject can verify. True, it needs to be developed, but so do many articles in Wikipedia, and the action is more to devolope them than to delete them: the work on wikipedia is built on continuing work on the articles. When it comes to a historical subject from another country, it may be more difficult to find information on the net, but as you can see on the Swedish Wikipedia, there are sources to ad. --Aciram (talk) 13:32, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * I may ad, that Helena Ekblom is mentioned in dictionaries about church history in Sweden. This can be seen on Swedish wikipedia, were one of the references is "Kyrkohistoriskt Personlexikon" (Dictionary about People within Church History). --Aciram (talk) 13:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Just add the publication information for the sources. If you have access to the sources, it would be good to add online citations to the article, but it is notable anyway.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:45, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:22, 19 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep I added an English-language source from Cross Currents which is an excellent 7 page scholarly overview of her life and why she is important. Unfortunately it's $ but if anyone wants a copy I can provide it in private, for verification purposes. The rest of the sources seem to be in Swedish making it more difficult but clearly a notable historical figure. She basically was a social dissident who used religion as a tool to question the entrenched powerful and wealthy. She was persecuted for it and placed into an asylum. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 20:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - reliable sources. dont really understand the point of this nomination.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:16, 19 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. The secondary sources that have been provided demonstrate the subject's notability. The subject meets Wikipedia's general notability criteria.-- xanchester  (t)  03:05, 24 October 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.