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.
Weak DeleteNothing Not much. Lots of Ghits, but difficult to ascertain as most aren't in English (Ghits = 211) Background: this bio was created by edit warrior User:Limboot in order to create a bluelink to a quote he inserted into his pet hate article Islamophobia(diff), since reverted by numerous editors including myself. EliminatorJRTalk13:57, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Is being a founding member of Denmark's leading anti-racism organization and a member of a EU high commission count? Because it took me about 15 seconds to find sources for that.[1][2][3][4] Seems he's notable in the anti-racism community in Europe, and it also seems he's working as a spokesperson for various anti-racism organizations rather than acting as an elected official. From what I understand from reading WP:BIO, one doesn't have to be an elected official to be notable in politics. Edit to add: 16,300 Ghits allover and 34 Google Scholar hits[5] also seem to imply notability for someone who normally works in Denmark and Belgium. --Charlene15:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, needs work, but "former" politicians for major parties don't lose their notability, and he seems to have been active in a number of places, even founding a significant organization. Needs work, but I'd say give it a chance. For a few examples of press coverage, see [6]. Night Gyr (talk/Oy) 23:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'd suggest creating an article about the group and merging/redirecting his name to it, since most of his coverage seems to be in relation to that. Searching google news turns up dozens of hits for the group being quoted as a source, as does a google search for his name or the group's name, which makes digging up the sources that talk about them difficult. Given the large number of internationally distributed, reliable news outlets that use him and the group as a source, I'd recommend giving them the benefit of the doubt. here's a cbc radio interviewhere's the report of a symposium where he was invited to speakNight Gyr (talk/Oy) 02:31, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - To prove notability there would have to be at least two reliable secondary sources, which there aren't. He fails notability, even if someone thinks he "should" be on here. Theredhouse700:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - although this was created by Limboot to make a point, he is notable in his own right (the Telegraph & Guardian articles being solid sources). More could be made of the ENAR angle - I'm sure that there is a project on racism that this could be cat'd / stubbed. - Tiswas(t)14:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Charlene. AS of writing the article has sources from notable papers. // Liftarn
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.