Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matti Häkkänen


 * 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. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 05:46, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Matti Häkkänen

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

Fails WP:BIO. Ambassadors are not inherently notable. This one gets hardly any coverage. LibStar (talk) 04:21, 5 August 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 05:31, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Finland. Shellwood (talk) 07:32, 5 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment appears to pass C#3 of WP:ANYBIO: "The person has an entry in a country's standard national biographical dictionary". Entry in 1978 edition of Who's Who Finland. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 11:44, 10 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KSAWikipedian (talk) 18:45, 19 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep for the reasons explained by Goldsztajn above CT55555 (talk) 20:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete in absence of reliable sources demonstrating significant coverage. Kuka kukin on (Aikalaiskirja) is 1) not reliable and 2) shouldn't be called country's standard national biographical dictionary. For point 1, it suffers from the same problems as many other Who's Who books, where the information is sourced from the article subjects themselves (see fi.wp article fi:Kuka kukin on). For point 2 I'd place that title on Suomen kansallisbiografia which does not have an entry for the article subject. -Ljleppan (talk) 07:26, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Kittos @Ljleppan, those are important points. I'm continuing to sit on the fence on this, but would note two things: Kuka kukin on is not purely self-published, it is curated, and long predates the Suomen kansallisbiografia. Notability is enduring, it's not surprising that biographical dictionaries 25+ years apart might have different entries, but we would not necessarily say those only appearing in both are notable. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 11:14, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * It's might not be technically self-published (as there is a publishing company involved), but what I've gleamed of their operations is not great and it appears to be extremely similar to the UK (RSP entry) and US (RSP entry) versions. I'm not claiming that the article subject is non-notable because they are not mentioned in Suomen kansallisbiografia, merely that inclusion in Kuka kukin on is (in my view) insufficient to reach ANYBIO#3. Ljleppan (talk) 13:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I think it's reasonable to distinguish between pre-internet era and subsequent versions; there's a qualitative difference. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 03:04, 14 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Handmeanotherbagofthemchips (talk) 15:59, 13 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete as stated, the dictionary aspect of this is arguable. There are many of these dictionaries out there which allow the subject to write their own text for inclusion. So, without extra sourcing outside of the dictionaries and the web crawlers that have picked up the dictionaries verbiage I would hold the vote to delete. --Canyouhearmenow 12:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per Nom. Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. Sourcing does not give a green light to an article that is basically a pseudo biography or resume. None of the positions the subject held give qualification for an article. -- Otr500 (talk) 08:10, 21 August 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.