Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nils Horner


 * 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 Keep. Only the nominator is advocating deletion, the consensus of everyone else is unanimous that notability is clear. A news event triggering the creation of an article does not necessarily mean that there is not more to the article than that news event. Thryduulf (talk) 01:55, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Nils Horner

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This page was created on the day itself of his death. That indicated that he was not notable enough for inclusion, and neither was his death a notable event (there are plenty of western death there). Ohter than that he is only referenced by his organisation and a WPost article about his death. That would then make this NOTNEWS. Lihaas (talk) 16:36, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - He was one of the most easilly recogniseable and respected journalists in Sweden. --Marbe166 (talk) 17:58, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Source?Lihaas (talk) 19:33, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep I would argue that Nils Horner easily passes WP:GNG as well as BIO. He was the Asia correspondent for Sveriges Radio, which in itself makes him one of the most important radio journalists (or indeed journalists) in Sweden. The fact that we have more than four million articles doesn't mean that every notable person is covered. Some will have their articles created when they die. If one is unfamiliar with the subject in question it might be prudent to question the notability in a case like this, but it's hardly a good argument for deletion an sich. He was well-known and respected journalist; it's worth noting that when e.g. the prime minister and the foreign minister comment on the news, they don't vaguely talk about the tragedy of a journalist killed while working, the importance of journalism or something like that, but rather comment on the career and accomplishments of Horner. A few examples to support this: En radioröst att sakna, Nils Horner öppnade världen för oss, Nils Horners karriär, Röster om tragedin i Kabul. I agree that any Swedish journalist killed in Kabul would have been major news in Sweden (especially as news are written by other journalists), and coverage alone isn't enough, but there are better arguments than "it's in the news" to keep this. /Julle (talk) 18:32, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Source? Hes not mentioned beyond his own work. As mentioned then, the other source is on his death...and his death is not notable eitherLihaas (talk) 19:33, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I linked a few sources in my previous comment, from the three biggest Swedish daily morning newspapers. Is there anything in particular you miss? I'm afraid all my sources will be in Swedish. We've already agreed that it's not the fact that Horner died, or the way he died, that makes him notable. No one has argued that it is, so there's no need to refute it. /Julle (talk) 20:13, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * If you're not happy with just Swedish media, this piece from Hufvudstadsbladet claims that Horner was "a well-known voice in Swedish-speaking Finland" as well. Norwegian Aftenposten talks about him as one of the most important journalists working at Sveriges Radio, which per definition makes him one of the most important radio journalists in Sweden. /Julle (talk) 23:01, 12 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - easily meet GNG. One of Swedens most noted journalist and reporter.--BabbaQ (talk) 19:47, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - so if a person's article is "...created on the day itself of his death", said person isn't notable? Right... No, Nils Horner is notable. Manxruler (talk) 22:41, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - "among Swedish journalists, he was a legend", "one of the best we have ever had" - from Australian and US press. Shame he had to die before people were prompted to say that about him but it doesn't make what they said any less true. Stalwart 111  23:54, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - As Julle. Rasmus 28 (talk) 15:27, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment -- If he was one of Sweden's leading journalists he would almost certainly merit a standalone article.
 * Developing an article on an individual who would mainly be covered in non-English publications adds an extra level of difficulty and I am disappointed the nominator didn't take this into account.
 * Nominator said the article was created almost right after Horner died, unsaid is that nominator nominatee the article for deletion about eight hours after it was started -- when he or she could have voiced their concern on the article's talk page. This would have been a more efficient use of the community's time than to make a nomination.  For all we know nominator may have been convinced Horner merited an article after all, or nominator may have convinced others that coverage of Horner should be merged and redirected to another related article.  If nominator had chosen to voice their concern on the talk page it is possible that their concerns could have been resolved, one way of the other, without any of the rest of us needing to be involved.  Geo Swan (talk) 16:08, 12 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep - WP:CREATIVE specifies that a creative professional is considered as notable if the person "is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors"; the sources that were already present in the article when it was nominated quote seven different leading journalists (including the editors-in-chief of a couple of the major newspapers, and the CEO for the public radio broadcaster, who was admittedly also Horner's boss) who, individually, refer to him as one of the best, or one of the leading, Swedish foreign correspondents. Yes, like tens of thousands of other eminently notable people outside the English-speaking world, Horner had no English Wikipedia article, but there is no doubt of his notability before his death. To say that he is referenced by "his organisation" is a little misleading given that his "organisation" is a major medium of news in Sweden - the national public radio broadcaster (and in any case the Swedish-language sources in the article are from the national public TV broadcaster, which is not quite the same organisation - not that that actually matters). --bonadea contributions talk 16:39, 12 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep He is a well-known reporter for Swedish public radio and his death also was covered well outside Sweden, in Norway in a number of articles in the public broadcaster NRK, this article also states that he was a well-known voice for many NRK listeners. Ulflarsen (talk) 21:23, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - Time to close this AfD.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:16, 16 March 2014 (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.