Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mikael Simm


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 01:19, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Mikael Simm

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

Does not pass WP:NPOL. Being a candidate and member of the party does not confer any notability. He has not been elected to any position in the Swedish general election. I didn't see enough coverage to justify notability. &maltese; SunDawn &maltese;    (contact)   01:00, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Sweden. — hueman1 ( talk  •  contributions ) 02:28, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. If I understand the sources correctly, his main political role wouldn't have been as a candidate for Alternativ för Sverige, but serving at the municipal council in Uppsala in some capacity, although the sources for this don't seem to indicate anything beyond the fact that he did attend a meeting at some point. Either way, neither municipal councils nor being an unelected candidate meet our inclusion criteria. I have tried to find sources to see if this biography could be saved by meeting WP:GNG in some other way but failed. /Julle (talk) 02:53, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete sources consist of routine campaign 'news', primary sources and passing mentions, none of which meets WP:GNG; and as unelected, fails WP:NPOL as well. (Incidentally, this is one of many similar recent ones, so I expect AfD will be busy with these.) --DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:20, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, having taken a look at the Alternative for Sweden biographies, I guess it might prove difficult to how live up to either WP:GNG or WP:NPOL for Andreas Feymark, Evelina Hahne, Yvonne Lindholm, Per Sefastsson and Sven Valerio. /Julle (talk) 12:53, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - No indication of notability at this point. I understand the creation of the article, but clearly the subject is not within notability.BabbaQ (talk) 06:35, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:NPOL. Fifthapril (talk) 06:52, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete the non- independent sourcing is way too weak. Draken Bowser (talk) 07:18, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep There are 31 sources which are far more than needed. He is one of the most famous candidates for the party nationally and is the leader of the party in Skåne County. Suffolkshire (talk) 14:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Suffolkshire, and welcome to Wikipedia. That is not quite how it works, I'm afraid. The pure number of sources says very little in itself. Wikipedia is a publication, and as other publications it has norms around what it wants to publish. Over the years, the Wikipedian concept of notability has been quanitifed (bureaucratized, some would claim), to avoid a conversation about what an encyclopedia is and should be in every conversation about inclusion and inclusivity. If you read WP:NPOL and WP:GNG, you'll see that there are certain criteria English Wikipedia uses when it tries to assess articles, and this biography is rather far away from meeting them. It is, of course, possible to question these criteria, and I would describe Wikipedia as constantly being in the process of defining and re-definting itself, but be aware that they build on more than twenty years of discussions between thousands of Wikipedians. They are not easily changed now. /Julle (talk) 15:07, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete. People do not get Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates in elections they did not win — the notability bar for politicians is holding a notable office, not just running for one, and a candidate gets to have an article only if either (a) he was already notable enough for an article for other reasons as it is, or (b) the article can demonstrate a credible case for why his candidacy should be seen as much, much more special than everybody else's candidacies. But neither of those things are in evidence here — and just because there are 31 footnotes does not mean that there are 31 notability-building sources for the purposes of WP:GNG, because the clear majority of those 31 footnotes are primary sources that are not support for notability at all, such as his own LinkedIn and content self-published by his own party. Bearcat (talk) 17:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - meets neither NPOL or GNG. Onel 5969  TT me 00:37, 22 October 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.