Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johannes Wahlström (2nd nomination)

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. After two relists I am not seeing signs of a consensus emerging. Just Chilling (talk) 14:26, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Johannes Wahlström

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Delete - Renominating because the subject is only notably sourced for his relation to Wikileaks and through his father Israel Shamir, both of which have their own page. There are no independent indications of notability in terms of sources, outside the Wikileaks controversy and his relation to his father. The latter two are covered in their own articles, and it seems content forking to use them for a separate article. Otherwise, there is no indication of independent notability, relevant to his actual work. The article itself relies on archives of non-notable sources, except one English article mentioning him in relation to the Wikileaks controversy, and that is through the link to his father and to Wikileaks (both of whom have own article that can cover this issue). Avaya1 (talk) 03:27, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:34, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:34, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Was kept as late as December 2017. I see nothing that would change my !vote since then. Still passes WP:GNG.BabbaQ (talk) 06:04, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It isn't mentioned in the English version of the article but it should be noted that Wahlström was also part of the team behind the TV documentary that exposed the fatal research fraud of Paolo Macchiarini (see information about the program as presented by SVT, Swedish national television: [1]) /FredrikT (talk) 07:26, 2 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Reasonably decent article. Cant see anything that would push this into Afd. scope_creep^Talk 22:31, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Where are the WP:RS referring to him as notable, or secondary-sources coverage about him (also the sources cited only mention in him in relation to content covered in other articles - his father and wikileaks)? Where is the evidence of any independent notability?Avaya1 (talk) 11:56, 16 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Just Chilling (talk) 12:33, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Reminds me of the guy from the girl with the Dragon Tattoo! MaskedSinger (talk) 17:17, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

MERGE to his father Israel Shamir. As Nom states, there's not much here. The argument for keeping, such as it is, is that he was dumped by a leftist Swedish newspaper after making up quotes to support a racist conspiracy theory article, and that he was willing to bear false witness in support of his boss Julian Assange, making slanderous accusations against two women who accused Assange of rape. I have improved the page somewhat, he has fans (among conspiracy theory fans, I suppose) but I see no evidence evidence of the kind of accomplishment that meets WP:JOURNALIST. Merge with his Dad, with whom he shares his Jew-hatred, use of fake quotations and fake facts, and boot-licking worship of Julian Assange.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:17, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Length=notability. ThatLawStudent (talk) 20:37, 7 July 2019 (UTC) Striking !vote by a sockpuppet. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 15:35, 8 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Length ≠ notability. Especially when, as here, many of the claims to notability, employment history are unsourced. And the well-sourced material is about his having been fired for falsifying quotations in his writing. When a low-level journalist is fired for faking his material, it doesn't make him notable. Just temporarily unemployed. He now works as paid propagandist. Michael Weiss of the Daily Beast dismisses Wahlström as a "fabulist hack". E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:54, 7 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per E.M.Gregory to Israel Shamir. Appropriate since it's the basis of his very-slim notability. JSFarman (talk) 00:15, 9 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 01:59, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, does the Swedish WP article, that expands on his achievements discussed in the english article, assist here? Coolabahapple (talk) 23:36, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article seems to be self-promotional (pehaps written by the subject) and much of its claims are self-sourced again (i.e. to IMEMC, which is the subject's website). There's little evidence of notability for an English Wikipedia article, especially as it was the basis for this article. Avaya1 (talk) 01:53, 19 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There does not seem to be much independent notability, only through his relations with Wikileaks and Israel Shamir. Taewangkorea (talk) 00:01, 22 July 2019 (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.