Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holger Lagerfeldt (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 02:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Holger Lagerfeldt
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article reads like advertisement for an unknown audio engineer/producer with little press coverage to meet WP:BIO and claims of notability fail under WP:Music (notability is not inherited). I also see possible COI issues. Kuriousgeorge (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2010 (UTC) :*Speedy Delete: The subject is a well known internet self-promoter who uses audio forums to spam and post personal links. On the first AfD and against all odds, he showed up on Wikipedia to say: "I came across this very interesting and at times amusing discussion via Google,..." . We got to discourage users like this from creating their own pages and to stop Wikipedia as a vehicle to spam. 216.55.165.144 (talk) 20:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC) '' Sock of User:Freedom5000. -- Brangifer (talk) 21:12, 26 December 2010 (UTC) ''
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- -- Cirt (talk) 18:11, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment "50 gold and platinum records during his career" - I'd like to see some evidence of this. In fact, I'd like to see some evidence for anything at all in the article - from reliable sources. Peridon (talk) 19:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:26, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
 * What does this say. "' This Is How We Party' ( skrevet med Holger Lagerfeldt), indspillet af S. O. A. P., 1998"? duffbeerforme (talk) 14:25, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * *Comment. It means "written with". He may have helped write a tune or two that charted but thats not enough. This writer, producer has insufficient independent reliable (third party) sources to show notability per WP:N and that's a good reason to delete . It's true that notability is not inherited, read this to understand why . Moreover, biography articles should only be for people with some sort of fame, achievement, or perhaps notoriety..46.29.253.60 (talk) 17:04, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:16, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per WP:COMPOSER, he is one of the composers/songwriters for "This Is How We Party", a notable song charting. ASCAP confirms the writing credit so this passes both notability, and verifiability. -- Whpq (talk) 17:40, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete insufficient (zero) sources to establish notability. Dlabtot (talk) 16:49, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - The ASCAP link I posted above is a reliable source, so there is more than zero sources. -- Whpq (talk) 12:46, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This subject has also the bare minimums to make it per WP:COMPOSER but it has no sources to support notability. And since having bare minimums is not enough at Wikipedia, I'll have to agree with Dlabtot. Ubot16 (talk) 09:38, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - meeting the bare minimum of WP:COMPOSER means that the subject is notable, and there is at least one source so saying he meets a notability criteria, and then saying that he isn't notable is contradictory. -- Whpq (talk) 12:46, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment To quote Whpq on another AfD he said delete: "This a case where notability is being made through association". What do you think this reason for eligibility under WP:COMPOSER now is? Honestly, one interview on any reliable third party source with details as to how the two or three authors came together to make these "smashing" hits would prob change my mind. But so far it's you who sounds contradictory to me. Then, 50 platinum and gold records? then show me where. I also know that somewhere in the guidelines there is something going like, just because a subject meets one requirement it doesn't mean an article should be included or that Wikipedia needs it. As a matter of fact, after reading the first AfD for this article, I'm more inclined to believe this is a case of Vanispamcruftisement. Ubot16 (talk) 18:22, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Reply - I absolutely agree 100% that those claims being unsourced, should be removed from the article unless they can be verified. However, that can be done by editting the article, without deleting it all. -- Whpq (talk) 02:36, 30 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Having not been overwhelmed with references for even a small proportion of the precious metal claimed, I'm coming off the fence. (Too cold up there, anyway...) A lot of association and not a lot of did. Even less backing, and in the pop music world you need good backing... Peridon (talk) 22:09, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete This is basically just a vanity page used to promote a subject and his business that has not yet been covered by the media. I tend to agree with the other users in this and the first afd that suspect this article is the result of Vanispamcruftisement. 83.170.85.92 (talk) 16:34, 30 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.