Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johan Bäckman


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 10:25, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Johan Bäckman

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article fails the notability criteria, with references to four primary sources (all Estonian press publications) reporting the same single event, which was an interview where he makes some controversial assertion about Estonia while promoting his unpublished book "The Bronze Soldier". Martintg (talk) 22:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep With seven books published and a controversial view on Finnish politics and history, this man looks notable enough. De728631 (talk) 22:33, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Doesn't seem to be notable outside of Estonia, but I'm open to being convinced otherwise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeGawl (talk • contribs) 23:52, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The reason this guy made news in Estonia that eventually brought him all the way to WP is not because of the seven books published and controversial view on Finnish politics and history, but because he recently came up with an idea popularized by the yellow press: Estonia to lose independence in 10 years as a follow up to the Bronze Soldier controversy. And yes, he got his 8th yet unpublished book to sell that's written on the subject. Does it make the guy notable and WP worthy? up to you.--Termer (talk) 02:15, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The books appear notable--he would be without the interview. And notable in Estonia or Finland is quite enough for notability. The English WP covers he world, as longas people will write the articles in English. DGG (talk) 03:41, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * For all we know, these books could be self published. I see no evidence that even the basic notability criteria, that the person has been the subject of published secondary source material which is reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject, is fulfilled. Martintg (talk) 04:50, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. If you follow the ISBN links in the article you can easily see that the books are not self-published. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:07, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * self-published sources have a specific meaning on WP, it has nothing much to do with following the ISBN numbers but only if the books are written by the guy or are those written about the guy, that what determines WP:Notability. Currently the only secondary sources about the guy provided in the article, once more, are about his statement in printed press regarding possible future of Republic of Estonia. There are no secondary published sources provided that would cover his notability otherwise. Since Wikipedia articles should rely on reliable, published secondary sources, once more, the notability of the guy according to the sources provided lies only on his statement about "10 years left for Estonia"--Termer (talk) 05:34, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete until any secondary published sources are provided showing that the notability goes beyond his controversial statement in the Estonian press. Please provide secondary published sources that has noted or relied on Johan Bäckman's scholarly work for me to be able to reconsider my current stand. Thanks!--Termer (talk) 05:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  22:00, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 08:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)


 * delete there is nothing here that makes him more notable than a prolific cookbook author, prolific writing isn't notability. --Buridan (talk) 11:16, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * delete his books are held by single-digit numbers of libraries (in some cases just one or two). Apart from that, he fails, per nom, on one event.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 12:01, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, both notability and verifiability concerns. I was unable to verify his connection to Helsinki University, for example. Huon (talk) 13:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep a few independent sources are interested in his interview, the article might be interesting in evaluation his books as sources Alex Bakharev (talk) 13:13, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * His interview still is a single event which is the sum total to his claim to notability. Are you suggesting you created this article so that his books could be evaluated as being more reliable than they would normally be? In other words, you are saying that one purpose in creating this article was to support the placement of fringe theories by a "historian" into various articles? Martintg (talk) 21:49, 13 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:18, 13 September 2008 (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.