Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Per Villand


 * 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 no consensus. There is a clear absence of consensus for any course of action at this time, and substantial improvement appears to be underway. This can be revisited in the future if editors feel that progress has not culminated in a clear showing of notability. bd2412 T 11:42, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Per Villand

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Just not close to meeting WP:GNG. All the cited references are either self-published or of local, minuscule interest. Geschichte (talk) 21:38, 15 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Hello Geschichte, today I have contacted all universities that are named in the page. Already yesterday I found a newspaper article about the disease ALS and Per Villand, searched for external links, found Scholar links, got an email from Terje Johansen, who works at Tromsø university, and who studied together with Per Villand, worked as a coauthor at a paper to get the Cand.Scient degree, and I have added the link as a reference in "Studies".
 * I contacted today the university in Ås (Norges landbrukshøgskole/NMBU) for a similar link to prove the Dr. Scient degree or title. It was difficult for them to search because I did not know in which department of biology Per Villand was studying, so I sent some links and a Scholar list with his name. I asked Terje Johansen to help me find the right department which makes it easier to search in archives.
 * I have worked at all missing details and I sincerely hope, though I did not already get all missing factors, this is convincing Wikipedia that the page of Per Villand should not be deleted, but kept. I do not believe this page should be a disambiguation page, redirected or merged. It has its value in its own, not because of the studies, but because Per Villand was and is beloved by all who have known him. He has inspired and impressed all. Because of his disease and how he handled this insane difficult disease, how he even cooperated with professors to find causes and maybe healing methods, is worth it to share with the world. DutchColours (talk) 19:15, 16 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Here again Geschichte to react on "minuscule interest". The page is about a person who died because of the deadly disease ALS at the age of 44. He created indeed a poor website according to what one is used to when made by a totally healthy person. Per Villand created it with his eye movements, because he was for 99% paralysed, lame, disabled. This is showing strength, a positivity that goes beyond any normal, or even most perfect human power that can create the most wonderful website.  DutchColours (talk) --DutchColours (talk) 19:26, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello Geschichte, I removed a sentence about the newspaper in the former message after I have read again the rules: all newspapers seem to be considered as not independent, and therefore not the right source. Today I discussed all around this Per Villand page with others and we concluded that it would be at least a better idea to make it a subpage (redirecting possibility, instead of deleting, or merging) of Hovet, Buskerud, also my project, and yes, Per Villand belongs to this village in Norway. It is important that a link to another Wikipedia page is there, in "Notable residents", to redirect visitors of this Hovet, Buskerud page to Per Villand. To add it on that page as a chapter is not right, because it would take away the attention from the main subject. Today I continue with finding the title of the book Per Villand wrote, the ISBN number, and continue with searching for more references.  DutchColours (talk) --DutchColours (talk) 08:19, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * What can I say? Wikipedia builds on second-party sources. The current references are: 1) Geni, not necessarily independent. 2) Solhjell, local history, brief mention 3) Hallingdølen, local newspaper 4) Villand, published by the subject 5) journal, can't access, but I'm guessing published by the subject 6) cell.com, published by the subject. You don't really need to find the book written by him, it's published by the subject so not suitable as a reference to Villand. Albeit probably brave and commendable, Per Villand has not been demonstrated to have coverage in the necessary amount of independent sources. But you can try www.lokalhistoriewiki.no. Geschichte (talk) 17:49, 17 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Geschichte, I have seen wikipedia pages with lesser content than I have created, and with not any link or reference. Pity that I did not bookmark these. How spectacular someone has to be? That there is a book, written by him, is spectacular, because he wrote it with his eye movements, he was for 99% lame, disabled, could not use his hands and fingers. I am not speaking nor writing in Norwegian yet, I live in Norway, yes, and learning the language slowly with my 68 years old memory. You should know Norway better, then you would not direct me to a library for this. The Norwegians in the area where I live (far away from cities and other villages, it is more a hamlet, have hardly any proud, do not talk too much, are in fact always silent. History made them so. It belongs to the Norwegian character. So, to shout around about people, who they were, are, etc. is utterly rare. That is not Norwegian style. The land has been occupied by Denmark, Sweden, and has hardly one hundred years independence. The psychology of the Norwegians is not understood when one never has lived in an occupied country, overruled by another country, and not any law was offering rights. Within this hierarchy is another hierarchy: the people of Hovet belong to a lesser place in the hierarchical pyramid. Created by oppressors in neighbour villages. Not because they ARE lesser, but they were and are the most easy to suppress. The most humble.
 * Again: I cannot add the information of Per Villand's page to the by me started and maintained Hovet, Buskerud page because I have more to add there and the page will become too long. It is a village with much history, that is hardly to be found somewhere on the web. Wikipedia-English is in fact too modern: the Norwegian wikipedia has, that is obvious for me, by experience, a much milder law system than the English wikipedia version. There is not a Norwegian Wikipedia page about Per Villand. I cannot write yet in Norwegian. But I can try. Is that an option? And, WHAT exactly you want Per Villand to be in his "passport" to be allowed to enter Wikipedia land?--DutchColours (talk) 10:53, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Geschichte, I have read about creating new wikipedia pages. Even a few lines are enough to create a page. I did more. Much more. There is not any rule that makes this Per Villand page worthless. It has the right to exist. I can even start a page about myself. I read in NRC, a Dutch newspaper with excellent research about subjects, that Wikipedia has rules concerning editing. It is not allowed that companies hire people to edit a wikipedia page, to make their name more shining. But these editors are there, they do a payed job, and nobody can do anything about it. This is the power of money. Title of the article: "De schimmige wereld van stiekeme Wikipedia-updates", translated: "The shady world of sneaky Wikipedia updates". there is a lot in that article worth it to be read, I can recommend it to everybody, also you, Geschichte.
 * It makes clear that what I wrote yesterday about the English wikipedia, is not so far from the full truth. The English Wikipedia is mostly runned by modern state moderators. The modern state is related with all what makes the modern state so "modern", and not so transparent. Modern is not per definition "honorable" or "high quality", on the contrary.
 * In this case, I write about an honorable person, who was born in a hamlet in Norway, and who got unfortunately a disease that killed him. If not, the man would have been able to continue his studies, and who knows how huge his name would have become. Again: he did something not even Shakespeare did: writing a book, running a website, while being lame for 99%. Writing with modern tools that work on eye movements. Professors from Oslo have been working together with him to dismantle the ALS disease, a killing disease where more and more people die from. He did not get enough time from life. Life became unbearable. The machines were closed, after a well thought decision. Per Villand has proved to be a master mind, controlling his mind by his human spirit that made it able to exist with even a disease like this. The most difficult moments were when he became angry, he told, because indeed, when you are for 99% lame, emotions are still there, and anger creates a hell when you have not any expression form to get rid of it. But he managed it. He is, though a humble man, a human being with high standards, and deserves a place among other Wikipedia people. When even a page about Adolf Hitler is there, and more human bastards, why not about a great human being from Hovet? He is an example for all of us. A source of inspiration in this insane world. --DutchColours (talk) 06:38, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Geschichte, I have been in your user page. I have clicked on Asle Amundsen. This is the text: Asle Amundsen (born 27 June 1952) is a Norwegian politician for the Socialist Left Party. He served as a deputy representative to the Parliament of Norway from Nordland during the term 1985–1989. He met during 52 days of parliamentary session.[1] The first deputy of Hanna Kvanmo, he worked as a farmer in Andøy outside of politics.[2]
 * Question Geschichte: What exactly makes this man so valuable that he deserves a Wikipedia page, and Per Villand not? I guess that Per Villand deserves MORE a place in Wikipedia than this Asle Amundsen. there are pages that you started with people that are not of a higher value as Per Villand. You wrote even about a footballer. What makes football of such a high standard that footballers, even without any glory, are accepted in Wikipedia, and not a man who has proved to be able to fight against something more heavy than a football team in a competition? Per Villand had his own competition. He is a champion. Though he lost. But he was fighting against a deadly disease, that is something else. No, Geschichte, you have proved yourself with your own pages that Per Villand deserves a place here, and that his page deserves to be accepted. Totally. With or without sources, because I saw that you named a book, written by Anders Gåsland, but you did not mention the ISBN number. Nobody can check if this book really exists. Today I am going to check all pages you created, to compare them with the Per Villand page, and adding notes with questions, what exactly makes these pages more valuable than Per Villand's page. Like this for instance: Good Clean Fun. I also love fun, clean fun, but I cannot see the fun of deleting a page of an honorable person like Per Villand.
 * Note Geschichte, what you wrote yourself on the top of this page: All input is welcome, though valid arguments citing relevant guidelines will be given more weight than unsupported statements. Your own pages are a proof and I added the links to these pages so that other Wikipedia editors can check themselves. Also for the terms on the top of this page: a disambiguation page, redirected or merged to another article, then consider recommending "Disambiguation", "Redirect" or "Merge" instead of deletion. could be used for several of your own pages, but they survived this and are there anyway. How is this possible? I did not check more pages, until now, I have to do some other work. I expect that you do not delete the page of Per Villand, but I do expect that you delete your note on the top of that page, about deleting. I made a backup of that page, and of this page. To have proof for other discussions. --DutchColours (talk) 07:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note Geschichte, that I am still working at completing this article about Per Villand. Still waiting for more emails from the University Umeå in Sweden and the University in Stanford, USA. Got some, with PDF's and a confirmation, but without a public link. Also waiting for the ISBN number for the history book about Hovet, Buskerud. Written by Per Villand. I cannot force time, I cannot force people. --DutchColours (talk) 09:31, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello Geschichte : Quoting what you wrote on October 17: The current references are: 1) Geni, not necessarily independent. 2) Solhjell, local history, brief mention 3) Hallingdølen, local newspaper 4) Villand, published by the subject 5) journal, can't access, but I'm guessing published by the subject 6) cell.com, published by the subject. You don't really need to find the book written by him, it's published by the subject so not suitable as a reference to Villand. Albeit probably brave and commendable, Per Villand has not been demonstrated to have coverage in the necessary amount of independent sources. But you can try www.lokalhistoriewiki.no. Geschichte (talk) 17:49, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) MyHeritage. Note: Geni is not the same as MyHeritage. So, a mistake. Check this out. And: Geni and MyHeritage are excellent sources concerning old names, and the history of names, traditions in using names, as in Norway where even the region where one lived is added to the name. check the family tree of Pål Olson Grøt. His name was Grøt when he started living in the area named Grøt. Before his name was Neeraal, because he was born in Hol, in the street Neeraal. And he was named Nerol, because this is the name as people say it (etymology) So: MyHeritage is a library of history. Some people make a mess out of it. Not all of them. the same with Wikipedia: not all pages are really brilliant. Some are even poor, but there anyway. Even pages that you created, dear Geschichte.
 * 2) Note: Solhjell, this is a mistake, it is not local history, it is the history of Hol Kommune, that is not local, but "kommunal". And even IF it was local, what is wrong with local information? Is local news in Norway (you are Norwegian) lesser important than the news from NRK or Aftenbladet, or more of these, Bergen, Oslo, etc? How outdated this view is. And how arrogant. This is discrimination!
 * 3) Note: Hallingdølen, local newspaper? No! so, this is a mistake! It is a regional newspaper. But even if it was a local newspaper you are wrong in making preferences. Again, you discriminate! Local newspapers are important for the facts where the "big" newspapers do not spend time for, not because it is lesser important, but because they do not have enough paper for all the local details.
 * 4) Note: Villand, published by the subject'. Respectless!! The subject is for a "thing", an abstract thing, not a human being. Per Villand deserves respect!! You humiliate! And, Per Villand wrote this while he was ill, with his hands on a keyboard? No! With a pen? No! How? With eyemovements. WHO can write such website? How many have created a website with eye movements? One!! Per Villand. Worth to be watched, and named. Respect!!'''
 * 5) Note: journal, can't access, but I'm guessing published by the subject. Again: Per Villand is a human, not a subject. Which journal do you mean? I cannot find where you write about. Reference please.
 * 6) Note: cell.com, published by the subject. NO!! HUGE MISTAKE by you Geschichte! this is from the Dept. of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. If you would have clicked on the link there you would have seen this. He was not alone in this: all names: David M. Kehoe, Per Villand, Shauna Somerville. This is published by: © 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. The names there have links. I consider your examination Geschichte, as shallow and respectless towards Per Villand, towards science, to Wikipedia, to me. I hope some other moderators will find what is written here.  --DutchColours (talk) 20:37, 21 October 2017 (UTC)....
 * 6) Note: cell.com, published by the subject. NO!! HUGE MISTAKE by you Geschichte! this is from the Dept. of Plant Biology, Carnegie Institution of Washington, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. If you would have clicked on the link there you would have seen this. He was not alone in this: all names: David M. Kehoe, Per Villand, Shauna Somerville. This is published by: © 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. The names there have links. I consider your examination Geschichte, as shallow and respectless towards Per Villand, towards science, to Wikipedia, to me. I hope some other moderators will find what is written here.  --DutchColours (talk) 20:37, 21 October 2017 (UTC)....


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:51, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:51, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:51, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Just a note to article creator DutchColours that you should not be formatting this AFD in this manner. a) Geschichte is not the "moderator" he is the nominator b) this bizarre formatting of the AFD page into your various  "Reaction" sections has got to stop, and should be removed. Read WP:AFDFORMAT for more information. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:11, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've removed the worst of the odd formatting in order to simplify matters. BigHaz - Schreit mich an
 * Thank you. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:06, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 02:48, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Seems like a cool guy, but I would have to say delete unless more coverage in third-party sources is found. CapitalSasha ~ talk 06:36, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete due to a lack of in-depth third-party coverage. Bizarre formatting removed at this point, too. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 07:06, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * All my comments were relevant. I am sure these have not been read. What are third-party sources? Some examples please. --DutchColours (talk) 07:37, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I have tried to find the user page of CapitalSasha There is no user profile with information. I searched also for the user page of Rfdpro who has added the first warning. There is no profile. How can I be accused and judged by a team without a face? I repeat my question: what are third party sources? I am still editing the page, and wait for references. There are Wikipedia pages with lesser content, and lesser references than I have. I do not understand 1% of all the threats for deleting. It feels as a power system, towards new users. --DutchColours (talk) 07:43, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * About: "A cool guy": May I remind you (and you would have known if you would have read the page) that Per Villand is dead? "A cool guy" is a populist term and not respectful for a scientist who lost his life because of a literally breathtaking disease.
 * Question for BigHaz: bizarre formatting? I created a layout that was easier to read, because all my words were necessary to defend the page for being threatened for deletion. The threats even worsen. What is the deadline? If this is an impossible limit, then it is a lost case. DutchColours (talk) 07:59, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Question for BigHaz: Have you checked the external links? Really? Can you offer me a comparable page that IS accepted in Wikipedia? WHAT could be third party sources here, how many do you want (because there are wikipedia pages with hardly any source, and just some lines), so that I can LEARN by studying WHAT is accepted by Wikipedia? Thanks. DutchColours (talk) 08:10, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Question for BigHaz: Can you explain to me why the utterly poor Asle Amundsen page is accepted totally as a mature Wikipedia page? Thanks. DutchColours (talk) 08:46, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Question for BigHaz: It could be an idea to reduce the content of the Per Villand page to exact the same total of words, and exact the same amount of references. DutchColours (talk) 08:50, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Some responses. Firstly, one ping is more than enough (I watchlist AfDs I've contributed to, so in this instance I would have seen your response/s anyway). Four pings is manifestly excessive, regardless.
 * 1) I can't speak for anyone else, but I've not said that your comments were relevant, irrelevant or otherwise. I've read them and digested them. There's a lot of them, and you'll find that concision is normally a virtue (do as I say, not as I do, here!), but I for one have read what you've written. "Third-party sources" are those independent of the subject of the article and/or their close associates. Unlike many terms used frequently on Wikipedia, this one is used precisely as it is out in the "real world". If you've not done so as yet - and I don't mean to point the finger at you if you have - I'd recommend starting with the notability policy for a description of how and what I and other editors are looking for. As Villand was a published academic, you also might want to look at the notability guideline for academics, which combines with notability in general as well. In the case of Villand here, one example I could think of in relation to his academic career would be other scholars citing him extensively and favourably. That's just one example, of course, and I'm sure there would be plenty of others.
 * 2) Rfdpro doesn't presently have a user page, which would be why you can't find it. Not every user has created one, and they're within their rights either way. The user page of CapitalSasha loads fine for me when I click on that user's name in the signature on their comment, and contains what I would consider plenty of information (a subjective assessment, but there we are). I don't know whether your comment regarding "a team without a face" is a reference to the lack of anyone's real names being on their pages, but users don't tend to list those unless they wish to - I don't have my real name anywhere on my page either, and never have done. Leaving aside the fact that there's nothing to be gained by "repeat[ing] [your] question" within an hour of asking it (I'm in Australia and was eating dinner at the time you asked, hence my ability to respond reasonably rapidly - catch me overnight my time and you'll obviously have to wait longer), I think you may have the process slightly around the wrong way. The object of the exercise is to have the sources before creating the page, rather than acquiring them later. Many users prefer to create their pages as Drafts first, to avoid them being tagged for deletion "mid-stream", as it were. The fact that there are pages with less content, fewer references and more problems doesn't really stack up as a reason to keep this particular page, as it frequently means that nobody has seen the article in question and proposed it for deletion. If there's an article you're sufficiently concerned about, you're entirely within your rights to nominate it accordingly. If you're having difficulty with the process (any part of it, from article-creation to where we are now), please feel free to comment on my User Talk page with any questions you have. I'm more than happy to assist where I can. Just remember, though, that there is a time difference and my assistance may involve referring you onto other areas rather than giving you a definitive answer. I've been around here for a great many years, but the project is truly immense and I can't claim to be a specialist in every part of it. I'd suggest that those comments go to my User Talk so as not to complicate matters here.
 * 3) [I'll leave the response regarding "a cool guy" for the user who made it] I used the term "bizarre" for the formatting because that's what it is. While the format we use here may not be to your liking, it is precisely that which has been used for any number of years, as the link from Shawn in Montreal makes clear. Administrators (I'm one, although I won't be closing this discussion) rely on the format being followed to make the call on whether the article stays or goes. Discussions which vary from that format risk the wrong outcome being implemented, which is to nobody's advantage. You'll notice that the reformatting hasn't removed a single letter of what you or anyone else wrote, so everything you contributed to the discussion is still there. Nobody is making any "threats", either. The discussion is about the merits of this particular article (not Villand himself, who I'm sure was a perfectly lovely gentleman) versus the policies which exist governing articles here. It may be of use to read WP:OWN on this point, too, since the discussion isn't about your merits, either. The deadline for an AfD is usually in the neighbourhood of 7 days, but you'll note that this one has been "relisted" as there wasn't a clear consensus earlier, so that gives everyone another 7 days or so.
 * 4) I've given you the general overview of what a third-party/acceptable source would be earlier. If you have further queries on this point, I'd suggest that's a good question to move to my User Talk page, and I'll do my best to assist there.
 * 5) As indicated above, the state of another article really doesn't have much bearing on whether this one should be deleted or kept. That said, Amundsen's page indicates (and, as far as I can read the Norwegian sources, cites a source confirming this - at least, he's second in the list of members of his party) that he was the deputy leader of a major political party in Norway, as well as simply being elected to Stortinget. Generally speaking, there is a standard which says that elected representatives at a national level - to say nothing of leaders and deputy-leaders of national political parties - in any country are going to be notable.
 * 6) It could be an idea, but that won't necessarily address the issues here. To return to notability, the article can be as long as a small Russian novel and still get deleted if the subject doesn't demonstrate notability. Conversely, it can be one simple sentence and demonstrate tonnes of notability. That's why comparison between "this article I want kept" and "that article which isn't too great" is never an exact science. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:55, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Answer to BigHaz: I like your information, and the tone in it, very much. I feel calmness in it, taking time to explain, and that avoids adrenaline in me to stress, to avoid deletion, to keep where I am working at. I would like to start discussing on your talk page about this, when you have found this comment and commented on it. The most important for me about what you explained is that I should keep a page as a draft till all is ready. I did not find the button for keeping it as a draft, so, I saved it, and on that moment it is published, obviously. I would like to make it a draft, now, to have the time to add all I need, because it needs a lot of time to get answers. Maybe some people are on a holiday, universities have many departments, and since it was public, I felt the stress growing. Reading the warnings for deletion created fear, and even more stress. This could have been avoided if I would have known how to save a page into a draft, to work at it behind the screens, that you control it, and when you have read and agreed with what is there, to publish it. This feels great for me. Thanks in advance. Greetings to Australia. DutchColours (talk) 16:27, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll respond on your Talk page, since we're probably moving away from the topic at hand, but to what I hope will be a more fruitful one. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 22:43, 22 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I did not mean any disrespect by use of the term "a cool guy"; I only meant to say that it appears he had lived an admirable life and I would like to learn more about him. Nonetheless there can't be a Wikipedia article without substantial sources independent of the subject. CapitalSasha ~ talk 17:03, 22 October 2017 (UTC)
 * CapitalSasha Of course you do not disrespect him, but some words do not fit within a certain atmosphere. There is also a difference in using words by older people, and the younger generation. It is a matter of awareness. Some words just do not fit everywhere. DutchColours (talk) 10:19, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

New updates, October 24, 2017:
 * I, the creator of the article "Per Villand" have added yesterday new references in "Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis". These are third party sources.
 * I am emailing intensively with Terje Johansen from the University of Tromsø, who was working together with Per Villand. He is cooperating with me in finding third party sources for his Cand.Scient degree and his Dr. Scient. degree. Problem is that the email address of Professor Terje Traavik (University of Tromsø) is not working, and therefore Terje Johansen of the UiT forwards my email for Professor Terje Traavik to him. Terje Traavik was Per Villand's supervisor. Professor Odd-Arne Olsen of the NMBU university has not answered my emails yet, and Terje Johansen is therefore also contacting him about Per Villand, and for third party sources. Waiting for an answer from the Michigan State University, USA. Per Villand worked there and it seems that all the official third party links are not accepted as okay. So: I work very intensively at it.
 * I have contacted Sigmund Krøve-Velle from the Hallingdólen newspaper about the book, he mentions in his article. Waiting for his email back. I have called the library in Geilo about the book, and wrote an email after the telephone call, for exact information, and questions. As soon as possible I am back here to update the progress of the page.
 * I am in a debate with user BigHaz (Schreit mich an) about this page on my own talk page to learn more about deleting, drafts, and how to keep a draft, and how to avoid deleting. DutchColours (talk) 10:26, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I probably wouldn't use the word "Debate" for the interaction we're having - certainly not at the moment, and hopefully not ever! But I'm definitely glad to see that you've taken me up on the offer of assistance. All these years under my belt must be useful for something. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 11:12, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * You know what I mean.... DutchColours (talk) 15:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I have got an email from Terje Johansen, UiT, with a PDF file, an official statement of the University, a confirmation that Per Villand has completed the degree Candidate Scientiarum on January 1, 1990, department medical biology. It is undersigned and has a stamp. There is the official logo of the UiT. I can upload this file in Wikimedia Commons and refer to it from the article-page. I wait for the agreement of the university. Obviously there is no other way to make it more official, since I had added already a link, a reference, but this was not accepted by user Geschichte. The same procedure has started about Per Villand's Dr. Scientiarum degree. We do not have more possibilities left to prove this. Did not get an email from MSU in USA. DutchColours (talk) 15:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I have added references to "Umeå university, Sweden": the links direct to official papers, when checking the first link: (US National Library of Medicine) search for the link "Author information", click on it: then opens a screen with this information: Department of Plant Physiology, Umeå University, S-901 87 Umeå, Sweden For the full list of Per Villand: Click on Per Villand, then opens this page. DutchColours (talk) 15:39, 24 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The 2nd reference is from PubMed as well. Title: Carbon dioxide and light regulation of promoters controlling the expression of mitochondrial carbonic anhydrase in Chlamydomonas reinhardtii. When there, on that page, one can see the name Per Villand, and a number 1 next to the name, and: "Author information". Click on it. then opens a small screen with the text: Department of Plant Physiology, Umeâ University, 901 87 Umeâ, Sweden. Which proves that Per Villand worked there. Improved a reference (Carnegie Institution for Science).DutchColours (talk) 15:37, 24 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Added a link to Per Villand's 300 pages book: "Søre Villand og Raggsteindalen 1889-2005 : slekta, garden og turisthytta", which is available in the library of Geilo, Hol Kommune, Norway. DutchColours (talk) 16:11, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

New Updates, October 25, 2017
 * Got information from the MSU university US:
 * Hello, Could you provide the failed email address used to try and reach MSU Human Resources? Here is their official contact information as listed on 'hr.msu.edu':
 * Email = SolutionsCenter@hr.msu.edu
 * Office Phone = 800-353-4434 (Monday - Friday, 8:00 AM - 5:00 PM EDT)
 * Since Per Villand was a biologist at MSU you could try and speak with Biological Sciences program using this contact form:
 * >> https://biosci.natsci.msu.edu/about/contact/
 * Biological Sciences is also part of the larger College of Natural Science, so another avenue is to contact them. Here is a link to their contact page:
 * >> https://natsci.msu.edu/about/contact/
 * Phone = (517) 355-4470
 * Beyond that I have no other resources to offer; MSU employee records are maintained either by their respective departments or by our central HR office.
 * Thanks,
 * MSU IT Service Desk DutchColours (talk) 06:36, 25 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I am going to work with this MSU email proposal today. Hope to have got the right reference at the end of the day, or tomorrow. DutchColours (talk) 06:36, 25 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The email has been sent. Got two PDF's with confirmations. 1) Candidatus Scientiarum / University of Tromsø 2) Doctor Scientiarum / Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU), these are uploaded in Wikimedia Commons and used as a reference. These PDF's were sent by Terje Johansen, University of Tromsø. Email for verification: terje.johansen@uit.no Both PDF's contain names and email addresses, telephone numbers, and can be used to check.
 * Was in the library of Geilo (Hol municipality) and they have indeed the book and the DVD. There are references added to this library, via a link. DutchColours (talk) 16:18, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
 * On this moment, the evening of October 25, 2017, there is only 1 reference not complete. This reference is the Michigan State University, USA, and this will be filled in as soon the email is in my inbox. DutchColours (talk) 21:15, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * , I feel that there is some miscommunication going on regarding reason for the need for sources. The point is not about the verifiability of the information on the article, it's about the notability of the individual in question. CapitalSasha ~ talk 03:30, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I will remove all words, that are not controllable. DutchColours (talk) 08:11, 26 October 2017 (UTC)
 * That's exactly not the point. Wikipedia doesn't contain articles about all information that can possibly be verified -- we only include articles when enough notice has been taken by reliable sources to establish that the subject is generally notable and thus of interest to potential readers. Your goal should not be to dig up verifications of every minute claim made in the article -- rather we need to find that notice has been taken of this individual by reliable sources outside of Wikipedia to the point that the general notability guideline has been met. CapitalSasha ~ talk 18:13, 26 October 2017 (UTC)


 * I understood in the conversation on my own talk page, opened by BigHaz title=User_talk:DutchColours&action=edit&section=13 more about the notability. Question: can you explain me, dear CapitalSasha the notability of Asle Amundsen? For the full discussion about this I copy here what is written on the opened discussion section on my talk page: .........................I see your point as well. And therefore again: how can you defend the existence of the page Asle Amundsen. WHAT is the notability of that? Being an invisible little politician somewhere? What is his contribution to the world? He is an unknown Norwegian politician. What is interesting about this one for the world? I would like to know you answer. About the page with ALS patients: I know that this exists, I have already added Per Villand there a week ago. What you said yesterday: "Don't give up!"...: I gave up already, I have lost my appetite, the energy, the heart, the spirit, because it is insane how huge the constant attacks and in my opinion unfair argumentations are. I am working now anyway with it. I am searching for the name of the instrument, connected with Per Villand's head, that he used to handle the keyboard of the computer, to write with this tool, not with his hands: these were paralysed, not with his toes, these were paralysed, Per Villand was for 99% paralysed, lame. With that 1% that still was not paralysed he was writing on his computer, via that instrument, and I am finding out how that worked, and when I know I will name that instrument exactly and explain it. Note: with this instrument he created even a book (does not matter if it isn't interesting for the modern world that is coming to it's end, as the Hopi Prophecy is foretelling and what we are witnessing more and more because of the climate change and the decadence everywhere), he could contribute to the human world, he has even offered his entire body to science, in fact to humanity, to conquer, battle this disease, so, his life had not become meaningless, and that is, in such a circumstance, a notability for all humans, who are in different but also in future-less circumstances. Question: would that page be notable for a Norwegian version of wikipedia, the Bokmål version? If so: again, why this Asle Amundsen got an English version? WHAT is his meaning for the world, the English language world of Wikipedia? Wasn't it enough that this page was there in Bokmål? This is utterly bitter to notice................... (end quoting) .........


 * The term notability is not exact, even Wikipedia cannot name it exact, it is an "about", approximately, a vague term, it is a philosophical term, not able to become exact ever. On a university this would belong in the Gamma section, not Alpha as mathematics are. Mathematicians want everything to be proved by exact numbers, and because Alpha scientists are working with numbers and formulas, exact in that way (mostly, because economy is not an exact science!), they assume without realising that they are not per definition exact, because they work mostly with numbers, and exact. This is self-deception. In this case, about notability, it is IMPOSSiBLE to be exact, to be "Alpha". Sasha, you are an alpha scientist, and here you judge, analyse my work, while using not exact formulas. If there are, these can be compared with all what is related with the term quantum physics, because they are intertwined with the one who researches the subject. Therefore it is impossible to filter personal views from notability. With this I have tried to explain how subjective and not objective you are, dear Sasha, because again: Asle Amundsen is there, in Wikipedia, and there are many more, with the same shallow or an even lacking notability. .............


 * In the past the notables (high notability level) in a country, city or village were those who achieved a lot within the values of that time. Common people were not notable because they were not high enough in that hierarchic power system, a power-pyramid. In the time we live in, a lot of the past is now seen with other eyes, eyes with a deepened awareness, and therefore lots of so-called common people, without notability, are seen now as not so common at all, and had in fact more notability than was seen in that time. While a lot of so-called notables, those who were/are accepted for their notability, were not notables at all, and if, below the zero level of notability. Discrimination because of wrong values born out of narrow minded indoctrinating media and other power-systems, is very difficult to dismantle.


 * As long the Asle Amundsen article (what a term for two sentences) exists, I am allowed to consider the deletion of the Per Villand article can be categorised as (though not intended) discrimination, because of unseen (the awareness does not see it) values and unseen high levels of notability. There is hardly any clear coaching this person, me, to be able to work with some exact rules, because these exact (!!) rules do not exist, and therefore the policy is so vague that it took all the weeks that this discussion exists, to try to make Wikipedia aware of this problem. And I fail in it.


 * My energy is totally gone, I am tired, so immense tired and so deeply disappointed. This is an insane discussion between a 69 years old woman against a wall of scientists, who want me to be exact while they are not exact themselves, even not able with the best will in the world to be exact. The deletion of the article is therefore based on vague terms, and not any scientist in the world can make this a fair play. I am in Wikipedia court, with not any lawyer to defend me. In exact words: I have not any chance.


 * To think about for all: in how far in depth the popularity level, the being accepted in the society, even worldwide, as a star, a successful person, in sport, music, business, name it, who won gold or lots of money, time to be on TV and other media, or having a title that internationally is accepted as notable, so again, how deeply the popularity level is intertwined in wikipedia with the term notability? If this is the case, then it is time for a more efficient policy: before wikipedia users want to start an article, it should be checked by a commission of a filter, if this has enough credits to be accepted as notable. This avoids loads of hours as loss of time.


 * It proves not to be efficient at all only to mention what is NOT accepted, not good, not this not that. Like: The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. Please help to establish notability by citing reliable secondary sources (I DID) that are independent of the topic (I DID) and provide significant coverage of it beyond its mere trivial mention (I DID). If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. Find sources: "Per Villand" – news (I DID)· newspapers (I DID) · books (I DID) · scholar (I DID) JSTOR (October 2017) The one who arrived after JSTOR was Geschichte and turned the page into "delete". All his arguments are battled, but still one finds stones to throw with.


 * A way to what it has to be exactly is to offer help, by showing the way, the right direction, by being exact oneself as a Wikipedia supervisor. After I did ALL what was asked, there is STILL not enough notability?? WHY there should be a five hours lasting documentary about somebody who is not notable? In my opinion there is a lack of common sense here.DutchColours (talk) 09:23, 27 October 2017 (UTC)

Keep, per educational value of the article in raising awareness about people with ALS, or Lou Gehrig's disease, and to uphold the humanitarian and ethical mission of Wikipedia as a community-generated compendium of knowledge. Since the person in question represents a vulnerable population of people with disabilities, the criterion of notability cannot be applied in the same way as with regular populations. This case presents a notable example of coping with an incurable disease and aiding medical professionals to better understand it. Furhtemore, the person's scientific accomplishments as a molecular biologist, including publications (Google Scholar; VIAF) and patents (Patents) are worthy to mention. --Taterian (talk) 15:28, 27 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Have checked the links offered by Taterian and created a new paragraph: Scientific accomplishments. Changed the paragraph title "Literature and Film" into "Literature and Visual Education"
 * Have seen the page about Jason Becker. This page tells me that he is still alive. So: his ALS disease is lesser aggressive developing as Per Villand's ALS. I notice that Becker has a more spectacular profession, concerning popularity, populism, etc.: he is a heavy metal composer. There are computer programs to compose. I know this because my own son is a composer. One can compose on a chair. There are no computer programs to create patents about research in molecular biology: a molecular biologist "composes" his compositions in a lab. The popularity of a micro biologist is, I am sure, almost zero, because there are no fans, only doctors are their fans, and they are too busy to be in the media, on YouTube, Instagram, Twitter. It seems that Per Villand's page unfortunately has been checked and judged by Wikipedia users that have not any, at least not enough, affinity with biology, neither with ALS, not any, or hardly any insight in the disease, in being disabled, and in what is ethical within this concept, what belongs to awareness and showing respect. Also from out of the point of view that disabled people are already discriminated, and yes, here in Wikipedia as well. Except by user Taterian. Especially user Geschichte is respectless, as I wrote, he even uses the term subject when it is about a human being. User Capital Sasha has proved to be not so exact as is so highly needed here. But she is consequent in rejecting the notability of Per Villand, without being informed about the heaviness of a the disease, that obviously seems to be different from the one patient and the other. Discrimination does not belong in Wikipedia, and therefore one must judge with an eye for differences, and value. Values are not exact, these are related with the present or not present awareness of the one who judges, and therefore Wikipedia users who judge can (while being wrong, not enough developed in awareness) contribute to wrong decisions about pages. This is a serious mistake in the system Wikipedia uses for users to be able to judge about notability. Users who have the possibility to judge and delete pages should have an awareness check before they get the permission. Awareness goes far beyond rational intelligence. Even professors can have a total absence of awareness. And here in wikipedia one can add everything on the profile with only a nickname, a user name, and not any proof about what is written there about their education. Also this is utterly dangerous for the development of Wikipedia. Yes, I have my full name there, and websites. It should be like in Airb&b: a passport check, that the account is verified. DutchColours (talk) 06:29, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

It might be helpful to refocus the discussion on the contents of the article in order not to slide into WP:AADD. There are issues that require attention according to WP:MOS as explicated in H:TMM. Specifically, the article would benefit from:
 * Being brought in line with similar articles in the Category:Molecular biologists, i.e., structure, infobox scientist, etc.
 * The day of birth and the day of death are both October 15, which may raise questions; an explanation might be helpful in the section dealing with later life.
 * Using images as visual aides and eliminating repetition, e.g., File:Farms in Hovet.jpg appears to be sufficient to illustrate the place of birth.
 * Making sure that images uploaded to Wikimedia Commons meet the requirements of free content by providing OTRS permissions when needed (see OTRS), because non-free files are subject to deletion; or re-uploading essential images to Wikipedia only following WP:NFC, WP:WPFU and supplying uploaded images with fair use tags provided at Category:Non-free use rationale templates, Category:Wikipedia non-free content.
 * Eliminating extra spaces between sections.
 * Reviewing categories and leaving only specific categories, such as: Category:People from Hol, Category:1963 births, Category:2007 deaths, Category:Deaths from motor neuron disease, Category:Norwegian people with disabilities and adding new, such as Category:Molecular biologists.
 * Adding template. --Taterian (talk) 15:59, 28 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Taterian thank you! I did all you advised. About the licenses: I have asked, before uploading in Wikimedia Commons, all who have sent me papers, photos, for permission to upload according to the Wikipedia licenses for sharing, etc. I got their permission. Question 1: please check the infobox scientist. I am not sure all is filled in on the right place. Never did this before. Question 2: In the category Molecular biologists the name Per Villand is categorized under P, not V. It should be V. Don't know how to change that. DutchColours (talk) 09:49, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

✅ --Taterian (talk) 21:01, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

In terms of the deletion discussion, I think that the documentary about Per Villand is key to establishing notability: I would say the article should be kept on the basis of that. CapitalSasha ~ talk 21:19, 29 October 2017 (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.