Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maria Amelie

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. (

Maria Amelie

Maria Amelie (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Unsourced bio for non-notable person. Damiens.rf 21:25, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very notable person in Scandinavia. The political debate is currently ongoing, and the case has received an enormous amount of attention in Norwegian media. The article contains several references that verify the information, and references to printed material covering the case will be added to the article later. At any rate, the person is a published writer of a best-selling book in Norway and the later developments in her deportation case should fall under the label of "significant events where the individual's role is substantial and well-documented." --Daofeishi (talk) 22:02, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with Daofeishi - Maria Amelie has made a massive impact on the Norwegian public debate on the rights of undocumented immigrants, with her best-selling book (published last September) and opinion pieces and essays, and the fact that she managed to get a Master's degree while she was not in the country legally. Her recent arrest sparked a public outrage. Every major newspaper is covering this. I think we might be looking at a significant policy change in Norway. Mirithing (talk) 01:40, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know about policy change, but when there's demonstrations of a noticeable size in all the major cities just a day after her arrest (considering the short timeframe that the arrangers had the size was impressive on an norwegian scale) and the outcry from political leaders and other public people all over Norway it might have a big enough impact to influence the upcoming election... Luredreier (talk) 13:26, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thing is that after the financial crises the number of norwegian news in english sources have gone down a little so it's not as easy to show how really important this is/might be. But would it qualify if we found an article about her in all the norwegian news in english websites? I honestly think that we can do that without any problem. (and I haven't checked if that's true but I'd be really surprised if it wasn't) Luredreier (talk) 13:43, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I know about at least one russian language news article about her if that would help... (from a russian newspaper or something) Luredreier (talk) 13:53, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, I suggest that we wait a couple of weeks to see if this blows over before deciding on any deletion. If it's still going strong then there shouldn't be any doubt about it's importance I guess... Luredreier (talk) 13:56, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:35, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:36, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This is about as notable as people get. Was clearly notable before the last days' events, but is currently on the top of nearly ever newspaper, and has resulted in a nation-wide debate about immigration policies. Searching for instance in the
  WP:NOTNEWS. Atekst (a closed search engine for most Norwegian newspapers, online and page) gives 148 hits for her before the recent incident, most of which are feature articles, interviews and similar (many of which by themselves are sufficient for notability). She was also voted "Norwegian of the Year 2010", which created large-scale media coverage. Article is fully referenced and meets BLP criteria. Arsenikk ^(talk) 16:01, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep This article was nominated for deletion shortly after creation and before references were added, but now has several. It needs to talk about her book in the article text and not just the infobox, and reference its importance, but clearly her notability is not just a brief news story but rather the news story has arisen because she is a well-known writer. Therefore
  WP:NOTNEWS does not apply, but the article needs to have that background in it. There may be a misunderstanding about foreign-language sources; they are fine for establishing notability as well as for supporting points, but translations should be provided where necessary. I encourage those with a good overview of the Norwegian press coverage of her career to add sources even if they are not in English. Someone's notability is not affected by the fact Aftenposten has discontinued its English-language service. Yngvadottir (talk) 16:34, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Speedy keep. Clearly notable, referenced as such. __
  talk) 17:21, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep per
  WP:HEY. Several improvements have been made to make it acceptable and to prove notability. Bearian (talk) 19:50, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep The case seems politically delicate, and is also about an important current event Øyvind Teig (talk) 10:43, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Arsenikk- --NorwegianBlue ^talk 21:10, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Snow keep. Per above keeps -- clearly notable/well referenced.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:38, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep The subject is clearly notable. The article, while initially lacking in references, is well sourced. ~Fenrisulfr (talk · work) 14:44, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep National cause in Norway: [1]. ^walk victor falk ^talk 09:08, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Clearly notable. 77.40.157.115 (talk) 17:02, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]