Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henrik Kreüger

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. Keilana^talk_(recall) 01:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Henrik Kreüger

Henrik Kreüger (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Work as teacher or as consulting engineer is not notable enough to warrant a seperate article. No detail and/or references provided about what are his important contributions to ventilation and isolation. May warrant a mention in article of his cousin Ivar Kreuger, but nothing else of note here. -xC- 18:06, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

• Very weak delete per nom. Wikipedia is not a directory of historical persons, even if they have had their lives taken note of in trivial detail by reliable sources. But I don't really know.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 21:58, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep as "head master" of RIT seems to be the equivalent of college/university president. We don't seem to have articles on any of these (I didn't check them all), though, but then WP:CSB suggests we might want to account for more limited non-English sources online and for a pre-WWII topic. --Dhartung | Talk 23:44, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:09, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
• keep I think head of KTH (think Sweden's MIT) passes WP:PROF, Here's the list of heads of KTH (in swedish, cannot find equivalent page in English). Also, he was structural engineer on the radio towers at a UNESCO world heritage site transmitter station [1], [2] [3]. This is mentioned prominently in the bio on wp:sv, but not in this wp:en version. Pete.Hurd (talk) 07:02, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep; head of a major Swedish university seems to be a notable position. I would say that people who have had their lives take note of in trivial detail by reliable sources are exactly the type of people that deserve Wikipedia articles.--Prosfilaes (talk) 14:53, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Keep Fails (verifiable) WP:BIO. That needs to be fixed. School head is not notable per se. "Contributions" are unsourced and fail WP:V. That needs to be fixed. (changing as I missed the importance of the school and of the position but the WP:V issues need addressing 16:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)) --Alfadog (talk) 16:13, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment What's not verifiable? [4] is a better source than I've seen for a lot of these articles. Susan Hockfield has an article, and if KTH=MIT, I don't think she's any more notable than Henrik is.--Prosfilaes (talk) 16:24, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Well, assuming that I have any clue as to what that says, where is the link to that in the article? If something is not sourced properly in the article, then it fails WP:V. And, whether a foreign language citation in the English-language Wikipedia meets WP:V would make for an interesting discussion. Perhaps that question has already been solved, IDK. As regards the other article, please see WP:WAX. --Alfadog (talk) 16:41, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
      • Yes, it has. WP:RSUE. I would might interpret that as meaning that unless a translation is provided, along with a citation of the original source, the citation fails may fail WP:V. The policy is not worded as well as it should be to clarify what is required of foreign-language sources. --Alfadog (talk) 17:00, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
        • I read as saying that English-language sources are preferred to non-English sources, if equivalent quality sources can be found, and providing certain requirements if a quote is used in an article. That's all.--Prosfilaes (talk) 17:26, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
          • "that it was published by a credible source, and that it was translated correctly." does not relate solely to quotes and that section implies that a translation is available. As I said, not clearly worded. --Alfadog (talk) 17:44, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, as per Pete Hurd. The president of a major university in Sweden is undoubtedly notable. I have cleaned up the article a little bit and added a reference that Pete mentioned. I have replaced "headmaster" with "president", as that seems a more appropriate translation of the Swedish "föreståndare". Perhaps the creator or somebody else could complete the refence to the "Swedish National Encyklopedia" and make clear what it actually references? --Crusio (talk) 11:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
• I fixed the reference to the "Swedish National Encyklopedia" and added the older reference to Nordisk familjebok linked by User:Prosfilaes. The author of this page, User:Lidingo, has not worked on Wikipedia since the 23rd, and is probably away for the holidays. Olaus (talk) 13:39, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
• Keep, without doubt. I must admit Alfadog's reading of WP:RSUE sounds quite strange to me, and in all these years has never even touched my mind, and not only mine, as it's been often discussed and quoted.--Aldux (talk) 14:09, 30 December 2007 (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.