Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helena Sångeland


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) LibStar (talk) 01:31, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Helena Sångeland

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

Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Fails WP:BIO for lack of coverage. The third reference provided doesn't even mention her. LibStar (talk) 03:57, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians,  and Sweden.   ❯❯❯  Chunky aka Al Kashmiri   (✍️) 07:39, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Bilateral relations, China, Mongolia,  and Iran.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:35, 17 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep. I've added better sources and coverage (and removed one of the English refs), like the longer profile from Göteborgs-Posten, the added newspaper articles accessible through sv:Mediearkivet. Sångeland is a career diplomat, having not only served as ambassador to Malaysia, Iran and China, but also headed the Asia and Oceania unit at the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and better coverage than apparent in the article when taken to AfD exists. /Julle (talk) 12:46, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. WP:GNG seems to be met. Fad Ariff (talk) 12:54, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep, it's borderline and most of the coverage is from the single event of being appointed as Ambassador to China, but a search under "Helena Sångeland ambassadör" led me to believe that enough SIGCOV exists to make Sångeland pass GNG. Devonian Wombat (talk) 21:59, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * There was a long piece about her in Göteborgs-Posten already in 2005, though, which was pretty central for my decision to argue for the article to be kept. /Julle (talk) 22:24, 18 February 2023 (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.