Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bjørn Ludvigsen

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:55, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Bjørn Ludvigsen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unable to find significant coverage of the subject, and I'd dispute his notability based on my research. InvadingInvader (talk) 05:44, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Sportspeople. InvadingInvader (talk) 05:44, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Would that refer to your extensive research of sources from the relevant time period? Geschichte (talk) 06:45, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:20, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 21:12, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - no evidence of notability. If sources are found please ping me. GiantSnowman 21:13, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per article improvements and sourcing. GiantSnowman 20:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:09, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - would any of [1] [2] [3] count as significant? Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I think it would be pretty extreme not to count them towards notability, i.e. in the direction of notability, but that it would be more decisive to implement them (and more) into the article to showcase what information the pieces convey. I'll put it somewhere on my to-do-list, but... Geschichte (talk) 07:00, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy for this to be moved to draft to allow for improvements. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:12, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting to consider suggestion of draftifying this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:23, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - per WP:HEY because of the recent improvements. @GiantSnowman:, @InvadingInvader: and @Geschichte: in case any wish to make any further comments. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:16, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  I would say Neutral because of HEY improvements. Still not a thorough article, and I'm on the fence when it comes to notability, but much better than before. InvadingInvader (talk) 19:46, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per even further improvements. Managerial career could probably be expanded upon. Lacks an infobox. Geschichte (talk) 20:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.