Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Sweden: Difference between revisions

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Sweden. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace “PageName” with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Sweden|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Sweden. For the other XfD’s, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia’s deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Europe.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Division 1 Västra (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:ORGCRIT/WP:NSPORT.4meter4 (talk) 19:52, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Det bästa från Idol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

These albums are not discussed as a group or a set. Fails WP:NLIST. Also fails WP:NALBUM and WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 16:47, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If the individual albums are notable, wouldn’t it be more appropriate to have individual pages? If they are not discussed together in sources, why would be bundle them?4meter4 (talk) 18:11, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Would that not be a question of WP:SPLITTING if and when we have enough material? Even if all the albums had individual articles, the lemma Det bästa från Idol would still be here, in that case as a disambiguation-type page. On another note, the writeup of the 2004 edition is now published. Geschichte (talk) 18:50, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are missed the point of what I am getting at. We’ve arbitrarily combined a bunch of albums that haven’t been discussed as a group which is WP:SYNTH. Honestly, I think these albums might be better covered within the season articles of Idol (Swedish TV series) from which they came (ie the album from season 1 should be discussed in the season 1 article). The albums themselves are more directly related to the individual seasons rather than to albums from different seasons. Best.4meter4 (talk) 19:41, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Communist Labour League of Sweden (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Political party that failed to ever win any elections/ get any seats. Not clear if this passes WP:ORGCRIT. At the moment has zero sources.4meter4 (talk) 02:22, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Sweden. 4meter4 (talk) 02:22, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:50, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – I know nothing of this subject matter, but I see that 21 years after creation, it still has no sourcing. — Maile (talk) 04:17, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep – If WP:BEFORE had bee done, it would have been revealed that the Swedish interwiki is referenced. And WP:BEFORE would have revealed that SKA appears in many potential sources, as being the first . See [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], etc. SKA was a small group, but is historically notable in literature as the first anti-revisionist organization in Sweden, and served as a precursor to the 1968 left and a bridge from the old SKP to the various groups on the Maoist left of the 1970s. —Soman (talk) 09:56, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How do these pass WP:ORGCRIT? Linking to a bunch of books without viewable text isn’t much of a demonstration of SIGCOV. (Although different countries have different access levels, so depending on where you are you might have access) if these had viewable text with in-depth coverage I might take your criticism, but they don’t. Offline foreign language materials isn’t something one would expect to come up in a BEFORE. Have you read these? What do they actually say? You are going to need to give us a bit more to prove your point because I can’t access a single word inside these.4meter4 (talk) 13:46, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – added three sources (at least one I would characterize as unambiguous sigcov) to the article from offline DN archives. You can view the search results (although sadly not the full clippings) here. Zzz plant (talk) 22:50, 25 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Chase Miller (soccer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

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

Subject fails to meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Let’srun (talk) 23:14, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, Sweden, Florida, New York, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. Let’srun (talk) 23:14, 19 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails WP:SIGCOV so fails WP:GNG. – UtherSRG (talk) 00:35, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Fails in WP:GNG. Svartner (talk) 04:16, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete fails WP:GNG Agnieszka653 (talk) 20:42, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: No evidence of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:GNG. Demt1298 (talk) 23:21, 20 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football‘s list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 20:50, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – no evidence of notability. If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me. GiantSnowman 20:55, 21 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete – Chase Miller looks like a slightly common name, but there are no significant coverage found. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 15:58, 26 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Categories

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Templates

See also