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. Good Job Eludium-q36. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 07:47, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jyrki Niskanen[edit]

Jyrki Niskanen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) - (View log)

This is (I think) some sort of CV, and is arguably so lacking coherency as to meet the "nonsense" CSD criterion. Previous prod was disputed, sent to AfD as another editor then placed another prod. No indication of notability (and quite realistically I also have not the first clue what this text blob even means.) Seraphimblade 11:07, 15 January 2007 (UTC)Withdrawing nomination per rewrite. Seraphimblade 18:53, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete. A career resumé does not make an article. Autobiography anyway. -- RHaworth 11:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Revised to keep. Watching a man lip-synch to an old wax-cylinder recording [in one of the refs] is not exactly a glowing review but notability has now been asserted by a third party. -- RHaworth 18:37, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I couldn't do it, Eludium-q36 could. CiaranG 19:04, 16 January 2007 (UTC) Speedy delete I normally like to try and salvage something like this into a stub - however, it doesn't appear to be possible in this case. No indication of notability, and defies my attempts to find any. Autobiography is foolish, rather than a criteria for deletion, IMHO. CiaranG 12:49, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete, salvage what? Alf photoman 19:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, not yet up to par but the author is working on it Alf photoman 13:29, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• weak keep keep, but certainly not a speedy delete. Actually looking at the resume, it lists a little over 60 performances and 4 recordings. I do not know whether this makes him notable as an opera singer --Would it make him notable if he sang a more contemporary genre? It could undoubtedly be sourced from reviews and wikified. The comment 'nonsense" does not apply if one actually looks at it and tries to understand & is perhaps a little out of order. DGG 23:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC),[reply]
• Delete. The article seems completely unsalvagable, and it doesn't help that I can't find sources in English. Pretty clear conflict of interest, judging from the author, User:Niskamies. --Wafulz 01:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, following re-write from the ground up. I've put together a 15-minute stub, which (I believe) clearly asserts notability. I shall invite those advocating deletion to review the revised article. It may be necessary to disambiguate in the future, as search engines return a published academic in economics, and I assume that these are different persons. Eludium-q36 18:24, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• commentThe article is now shorter, is to the point, and has appropriate sources. Will those having voted delete please look again. I change my own vote from weak keep to keep. DGG 18:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Withdraw, call me stunned, but looks like there's actually something here. Good job Eludium! Seraphimblade 18:53, 16 January 2007 (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.