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 merge to List of supercentenarians by continent#Oldest European people ever. The consensus seems to be to merge this to the [(List of Finnish supercentenarians]]. However, as that list has been merged into List_of_supercentenarians_by_continent#Oldest European people ever, I have selected that page as merge target. Randykitty (talk) 14:19, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Aarne Arvonen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No independent notability besides this person's reaching an advanced age. His entries on the List of the verified oldest men and List of Finnish supercentenarians are sufficient. — JFG ^talk 11:01, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 13:43, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This article blatantly fails WP:GNG, WP:BIO1E, WP:NOTINHERITED and WP:NOPAGE. There is no policy that being old is notable and this article is packed with longevity fancruft like he was the last known veteran of a war and his astronomy club membership information. His name, life dates, and nationality are best handled on the two lists they already reside on. This WP:PERMASTUB is not needed. Newshunter12 (talk) 01:08, 24 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Significant, ongoing coverage from 1998 (when he was interviewed on TV on the 80th anniversary of the end of WWI) to his death over 10 years later. We are not judging the quality of the article, or the number of references included in it. He meets WP:GNG: "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", and WP:SUSTAINED. Saying there is no policy that being old is notable is not a reason to delete an article about someone who meets WP:GNG. There is no policy that being old excludes one from being notable, either. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:29, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to List of Finnish supercentenarians. There looks to be enough for a minibio, as his longevity in relation to the Finnish civil war garnered a little coverage, but not a full article. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 13:51, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No objection to redirecting and writing a mini-bio on the list. — JFG ^talk 14:15, 29 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, per RebeccaGreen – meets the GNG and WP:SUSTAINED. /Julle (talk) 08:32, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  How is 3 paragraphs enough for a standalone article? The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:48, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In an encyclopedia? Three paragraphs is plenty long – longer than most articles in the typical printed modern encyclopedia that most of our readers still grew up with. Many articles should be 1–3 paragraphs long, in my opinion. It's what people are looking for when they just want to quickly look something up. Hiding everything in long articles is just doing the readers a disservice. Furthermore, this article is longer than the length at which our guidelines recommends starting thinking about combining it with other articles for length reasons. /Julle (talk) 17:39, 1 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Given the lack of anything else at the list of Finnish supercenetnatrians, it seems to me that's a perfect place to put this. Not much, but enough for that. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:34, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We disagree on both points, I'm afraid. You think this article is too short; I believe this is a very good length for a Wikipedia article and that we should have more articles of roughly this length – perfect overview for an encyclopedia, and about the length (and longer!) than many articles in the classic encyclopedias of the 20th century. Not just because they were printed on paper, but also because it's a good length to give the kind of quick presentation many readers want. You think this would work well in the list; I believe that the list works better as it is and that adding a reasonably long biography in a list article where no one else has anything like it would skew the focus and make it unbalanced. /Julle (talk) 20:43, 2 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to the finnish page. Getting old is not enough for a stand alone article. Printed encyclopedias do not and would not have wasted a paragraph on this person, so that is a red herring. Legacypac (talk) 08:01, 3 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete/merge/redirect. Another obvious NOPAGE. The only facts actually about him, veteran of the Finnish Civil War of 1918 having served for the Red Guard. After the Civil War he spent a year at the Tammisaari prison camp can be presented in a list. EEng 05:39, 4 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete not in any way independamtly notable and getting old is not that notable. Legacypac (talk) 06:22, 7 December 2018 (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.