Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Magnus Vinding


 * 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. ✗ plicit  12:06, 13 April 2022 (UTC)

Magnus Vinding

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

Non-notable individual, no substantial coverage of him or his books in independent RS found. (interviews/podcasts don't count towards GNG) (t &#183; c)  buidhe  01:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  01:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  01:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  01:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  01:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  01:45, 6 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete No evidence of notability, poor sourcing (none of it seems independent), and (this is a feeling, nothing factual), it feels a little promotional to me. --SilverTiger12 (talk) 13:10, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the opinion.
 * Both books Suffering-Focused Ethics: Defense and Implications and Reasoned Politics have been endorsed by more notable individuals like David Pearce and Jamie Mayerfeld (e.g. here). I didn't want to mention this because that would seem like promotion, I thought. But if such endorsements serve as evidence of notability, I can include them in the article.
 * Re. more independent sources: I just updated the article to include such sources. BR, Plasmastate (talk) 17:37, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The sources you added seem to either be by Vinding or say virtually nothing about him. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  20:43, 6 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails GNG, NBIO and PROF as per Google and Google News searches for the subject. I don't see any content that could be merged. The article is just a list of things Magnus Vinding has written, plus a redlink to the organisation he set up. Comment for : note that Wikipedia has established definitions of notability; it is not fully up to us to debate here. To keep this article about Magnus Vinding, it needs to be shown that he meets either WP:GNG, or WP:NBIO or WP:PROF (the two subject-specific guidelines for articles about persons).  ‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎  02:25, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that the subject does meet WP:GNG, since Magnus Vinding has been interviewed by a number of independent (as far as I can tell) sources, which I don't see a reason to call unreliable (interview 1, interview 2, interview 3, interview 4, interview 5, interview 6, panel 1). Plasmastate (talk) 18:29, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * OK and is that coverage (of Magnus Vinding) in those interviews significant? What's in the article doesn't seem like it. E.g. discussion of his background, things he did and his ideas ‎⠀Trimton⠀‎‎  20:50, 11 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Interviews are clearly not independent sources (as they are produced, clearly, in collaboration with the subject...); and nothing else to substantiate a claim of meeting WP:GNG has been presented. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 04:48, 13 April 2022 (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.