Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Netherlands

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Netherlands. 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:

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.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Netherlands|~~~~}} 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 Netherlands. 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:

WikiProject Deletion sorting/Netherlands/archive

Purge page cache

watch

See also: Wikipedia:Notice board for Dutch wikipedians

Scan for Netherlands related AfDs

Scan for Netherlands related Prods
Scan for Netherlands related TfDs

Netherlands

Joan Willem Schreuder Jonkman

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

I cannot find anything else than genealogical data. Schreuder was indeed the son of the Governor of Ceylon but notability is not inherited. His name does not appear in the cited sources by Kroes, Wrede and Fieberger, that can be consulted online. I cannot find additional sources. Does not pass WP:GNG Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 22:49, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Netherlands. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 22:49, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Austria-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 23:15, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The article's creator PeterLSJ has not edited since 2018. — Maile (talk) 23:20, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Fails both WP:N and WP:NOTINHERITED. Multiple search engines show nothing significant about the subject. Ratnahastin (talk) 03:35, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - his military rank and rank in the nobility are not high enough for automatic notability, and there aren't enough sources for sufficient coverage. Bearian (talk) 20:13, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Niels ten Oever

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

I don't think subject passes WP:NPROF - he is asst. prof, h-index of 12 and no named chair or prestigious professional memberships I can locate. Although he is briefly quoted in a few news articles due to his association with digital rights group Article 19, I don't see anything that would qualify as WP:SIGCOV for WP:ANYBIO. He co-authored a book w/ over a dozen other people but I can only find one possibly independent review in a reliable source. WP:BEFORE was done in google news/books/scholar, JSTOR, newspapers.com, and PressReader (looking for Dutch and English sources). I don't see a clear merge/redirect target, and ultimately I think this might be WP:TOOSOON - as subject is still in relatively early days of his career (first publication was in 2017). Zzz plant (talk) 22:05, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Internet, and Netherlands. Zzz plant (talk) 22:05, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed on WP:NPROF. But this might qualify as WP:SIGCOV for WP:ANYBIO ? The work he has done with Mallory Knodel on oppressive language in the IETF got coverage in the New York Times ^[1], and the work he has done internet sanctions got covered in different places ^[2]^[3]. He also gets more widely cited about internet infrastructure governance issues, most notably outages in Wired ^[4] and The Face ^[5], on internet history and Web3 in the New Scientist ^[6], and on history of e-mail in Vox ^[7]. Seems to have more coverage in Dutch media. Detlevore (talk) 22:42, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Conger, Kate (2021-04-13). "'Master,' 'Slave' and the Fight Over Offensive Terms in Computing". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2025-05-09.
^ Comment, Sebastian Moss (2022-03-03). "Ukraine invasion brings Internet governance neutrality question into focus". www.datacenterdynamics.com. Retrieved 2025-05-09.
^ "Ukraine invasion: We should consider internet sanctions, says ICANN ex-CEO". Archived from the original on 2025-02-07. Retrieved 2025-05-09.
^ Stokel-Walker, Chris. "What really went down when the internet went down". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 2025-05-09.
^ "Who owns the internet?". The Face. 2021-06-11. Retrieved 2025-05-09.
^ #author.fullName}. "What is Web3 and how will it change the way we use the internet?". New Scientist. Retrieved 2025-05-09. {{cite web}}: |last= has generic name (help)
^ Morrison, Sara (2021-09-06). "How a simple email address makes things complicated". Vox. Retrieved 2025-05-09.

Reply from nom - my rationale was that in most of the coverage linked above he is just quoted (i.e. if you ctrl+f his (first/sur)name you find basically 1-2 results). As it doesn't really go in-depth about him specifically, I didn't consider it sigcov. It's very impressive to have your work mentioned in prestigious publications so early in career, I'm just not sure it confers notability. Zzz plant (talk) 23:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No pass of WP:Prof Assistant professors are almost never notable for WP:Prof and this is no exception. Xxanthippe (talk) 22:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC).[reply]
Delete - It's too soon for this emerging academic. The low h-index score indicates that they are not notable per WP criteria WP:PROF nor do they meet WP:GNG at this time. Perhaps in a few years after there is more attention to his work and research. Netherzone (talk) 22:56, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks - that makes sense! Detlevore (talk) 23:15, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I don't see how he would be notable at present. gidonb (talk) 00:13, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PUSCII

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

There does not seem to be any reliable independent coverage on this center. Afonso Dimas Martins (talk) 18:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. – The Grid (talk) 19:03, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are now two academic and one journalist publication amongst the references, isn't that enough reliable independent coverage? Qrusty (talk) 10:12, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Small and short-lived infoshop. References are either passing or not independent. gidonb (talk) 06:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Bospoldervos

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

I don't think this public sculpture of a shopping fox meets notability criteria for works of art. Fails WP:GNG. The sourcing is weak, a blog and what appears to be a human interest story. A BEFORE search finds social media postings but not anything of substance. Bringing it here for the community to decide. Netherzone (talk) 16:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Visual arts and Netherlands. Netherzone (talk) 16:20, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Florentijn Hofman. -- Itzcuauhtli11 (talk) 18:08, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.There seems to be quite a few news stories from when it was built/completed in 2020[1][2][3][4][5] and it's now getting sustained coverage such as this 2024 book[6]. The alternative to deletion would be a merge to Florentijn Hofman. Jahaza (talk) 18:06, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for finding those, Jahaza. The book, 1000 Things to Do in the Netherlands, is not a serious art historical analysis, it's like a tourist guide, so I wouldn't consider it a reliable source. Good work on finding the local news articles about the progress, but again, not sure about these, as it's local coverage reporting on a local spectacle. You came up with an excellent merge target as an alternative to deletion, makes a lot of sense. Netherzone (talk) 19:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge urgently into Florentijn Hofman. Totally unclear why this was spun out. gidonb (talk) 02:43, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

20th Kisei

AfDs for this article:

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

Insufficient independent in-depth sources to establish notability. The page is a record of a tournament, rather than an encyclopedia page. The contest has run since 1977, but there have been no individual pages since 2008. I've put some through PROD, but some have been dePRODed in 2008, 2010 & 2013 (22, 24 & 25). This one (20th) went to AfD in 2007. I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

Blackballnz (talk) 09:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events, Games, and Netherlands. Shellwood (talk) 10:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Blackballnz: per WP:BEFORE, what is your assessment of the Japanese sources on various Kisei editions? MarioGom (talk) 21:56, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your comment. I don't read Japanese but would welcome the involvement of someone who does. Of the articles listed above, around half have no sources at all. The rest are sourced to links with similar tournament information, which could not be said to be independent. Many of these articles have no leads. When 20th Kisei went to AFD in 2007, editors said they would work to bring them up to standard. That as 18 years ago, and very little has changed. The articles above relate to the years 1977 - 2007. In recent years, there have been no articles, but all the winners are listed on Kisei (Go). Blackballnz (talk) 00:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the answer. So note for the closer and other participants: someone should assess the existing sources WP:BEFORE deciding here. MarioGom (talk) 09:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Johan Schmitt

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

LUGSTUB-a-like for a non-notable athlete who competed at the Olympic games, once. Nothing in my WP:BEFORE, though the fact that the name of the subject is literally the Dutch version of "John Smith" hardly helps. A search on RKD yields a single-paragraph description - not WP:SIGCOV. FOARP (talk) 12:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Olympics, and Netherlands. FOARP (talk) 12:17, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sport of athletics-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:13, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Netherlands at the 1908 Summer Olympics#Gymnastics if there is no significant coverage. By the way, is RKD a reliable source? ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:52, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
RKD is certainly a reliable source for artists, not for gymnasts. An artist with an RKD entry is presumably notable. I assume that the article can be saved based on Schmitt`s notability as an artist. I´ll look into it in the next few days. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 22:54, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Schmitt was part of the Dutch team that won a silver medal at the second World Gymnastics Championships in 1905. He came in 9th at the individual all around event that year. He was dutch national champion when the dutch team participated in the 1908 Summer Olympics. For these reasons, he explicitly meets WP:NGYMNAST. I have updated the article with this info. He also had formal training as an artist (drawing, sculpture) and was an accomplished musician (piano). A query at Delpher with the search term "J.H.A.G. Schmitt" renders over 200 hits in newspapers, magazines and books. I have not found a full biography but there are many references that show his activity as a gymnast, teacher, chairman of gymnastics associations, musician and drawer.Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 00:26, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Ruud Buitelaar, @Svartner - No individual medals were awarded at any gymnastics championships prior to 1922: they were purely team events (see page 76 here). At some point after 1922 (possibly as late as 2006 since the 1981 history doesn't mention it but the 2006 one does) scores were awarded retrospectively. A retrospectively-awarded score awarded years later is not the same as one received at the time for our purposes, since the coverage that surrounds winning a medal won't have happened.

Team medals were awarded, but per WP:NTEAM, individuals don't inherit the notability of their team.

Since Schmitt is such a common name, we cannot simply rely on numbers of hits as a source of coverage.

I'm happy to withdraw if a single instance of significant coverage in an independent, reliable source (as is required for all sports biographies per WP:NSPORTS2022) can be produced for Schmitt, but not for single-sentence mentions that don't reach the SIGCOV standard. FOARP (talk) 09:20, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep – Per Ruud Buitelaar analysis. The subject is notable considering beyond the sporting context. Svartner (talk) 04:10, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. The preoccupation over whether the subject meets NGYMNAST or not is misplaced, as per the overarching NSPORT guideline a source of IRS SIGCOV is required to be cited in the article for any presumptions of further GNG coverage existing to be applied. @Svartner @Ruud Buitelaar I've also looked through the Delpher archive and every single one of the 141 hits for "J. H. A. G. Schmitt" gymnastiek is either from in-house publications of orgs Schmitt belonged to (e.g. the "official organ" of the Dutch Olympic Committee, Zaan Gymnastics Association, etc.), or a passing mention:
Non-independent:

(62 hits) Passing mentions in "Het turnblad; orgaan van het Nederlandsch Gymnastiek Verbond": [7]
(1 hit) Passing mentions in "Tijdschrift van het Nederlandsch Gymnastiek-Verbond": [8]
(2 hits) KNGV announcement in "Olympic Day" (published by Dutch Olympics Committee) that says he will provide "piano accompaniment" at some KNGV event: [9]
(3 hits) Passing mentions in "De Revue der Sporten: Officieel Orgaan van het Nederlandsch Olympisch Comité": [10][11]
(2 hits) Passing mentions in "Algemeen Sportblad Voor N.-Holland: Officieel orgaan van den [...] Zaanschen Turnbond": [12][13]
(1 hit) An announcement in "Weekly of the General Dutch Diamond Workers' Union" by the Arbeiders Gymnastiek Vereeniging listing him as its director: [14]
(3 hits) Passing mentions in primary government "Report on the state of higher, secondary, and primary schools", e.g. By council resolution of 22 September, the municipal council appointed J. H. A. G. Schmitt as his successor for the current school year, who took up his position on 16 October. [15] and A periodic increase in annual salary was granted to J. H. A. G. Schmitt and Miss Dr. M. J. Baale.[16]
(5 hits) Announcements in "De lichamelijke opvoeding; orgaan van de Vereeniging van Gymnastiek-Onderwijzers (L. en M.O.) in Nederland" (official organ of the Association of Gymnastics Teachers): [17]
(2 hits) Passing mentions in "Nederlandsche sport: officiëel orgaan der [...] Nederl. Gymnastiek Verbond": [18][19]
(4 hits) His name in a list of Olympics entrants published repeatedly by the "De Sport" the "official organ of the Rotterdam Football Association": [20][21]
(1 hit) Apparently the alderman of the Amsterdam Gymnastics Association mentioned him as the former Association director and a current "musical accompanist at the ladies' practices" in a speech at an AGA celebration: [22]

Potentially independent, but trivial and/or primary:

(1 hit) Name in a list in "Sport en sportwereld": [23]
(52 hits) Name in a directory of grammar school teachers(??) in many "State Almanac" editions, e.g.: [24][25][26][27][28] (names in these lists are not deemed important enough to be in the index[29])

JoelleJay (talk) 16:14, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow! Nice job, @JoelleJay! I was just going through the same hits and, by and large, agree with your assessment that the vast majority, very close to 100%, are passing mentions. Whether or not the magazine of the Gymnastics Association is an independent source may be a matter of debate. In the article, I added a citation in Revue der Sporten that is rather critical of Mr Schmitt`s design of the poster for the 50th anniversary of the Association. I also cite a volume of Het Leven Geillustreerd, clearly an independent publication, dedicated to the same celebration, mentioning Schmitt as head organizer. Anyway, I made my point. I´ll make an entry for Schmitt in the Dutch Wikipedia so this information will not get lost if it is decided that the english version should be transformed in a redirect. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 16:39, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruud Buitelaar, according to NSPORT governing sports bodies are not considered independent so that magazine and all the others that are "official organs" of sporting orgs are definitely not independent. While HLG does seem independent, all it has is a photo caption stating "The head instructor, JHAG Schmitt", which is not enough for SPORTSCRIT. Revue der Sporten was published by the Dutch Olympic Committee and so is also not independent. Good idea to add it to nl.wp though! JoelleJay (talk) 17:00, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Hopefully the nl wiki generates more info. I found a newspaper article (Nieuwsblad van het Noorden), definitely independent, that reports in some detail that Schmitt organized workshops to introduce rhythmic gymnastics in the Netherlands in the 1920s. On these occasions he also played the piano. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 18:49, 30 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep: person meets WP:NGYMNAST with significant coverage likely to exist. Per point 1 winning a medal at world championships and if he was also national champion in 1908(?) also per point 2. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 12:49, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak keep leaning to Keep~~: possibly meets point 2 of WP:NGYMNAST winning an individual national champion title in 1908(?). But also as introducer of rhythmic gymnastics in the Netherlands that is claimed in the article (didn't check the source) and as director of main gymnastics clubs. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 12:49, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
NGYMNAST point 1 says (emphasis mine): Won a senior individual medal at an elite international competition, so no, doesn't meet that with a team medal. Point 2 is for individual events. Also note JoelleJay's point that even if a subject meets NGYMNAST, at least one source is still required. I'm a bit reluctant to !vote on this one, considering Ruud Buitelaar's arguments above, but on the sourcing and the evidence, this looks like a reluctant redirect from me. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 14:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, yes my fault. I missed it was a team event. I will adjust my vote. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 15:02, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@95.98.65.177, the more salient point here is that the article is required to cite a source of IRS SIGCOV, which it does not. JoelleJay (talk) 16:44, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I added a few more citations. The poor showing at the 1908 Summer Olympics did cause a stir and Schmitt got some heat. De Telegraaf, a leading Dutch newspaper, and several other newspapers reported about Schmitt´s leading role in organizing entertainment for the team, which was seen as a lack of attitude toward the games. We had missed those news articles because he is not mentioned as "J.H.A.G. Schmitt" but as "Joh. Schmitt". Indeed, as WP:NGYMNAST states, SIGCOV is likely to exist for people like Schmitt. I continue my search. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 23:22, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sirfurboy and @JoelleJay: All Wikipedia articles require multiple IR SIGCOV to pass GNG. Even only one provided is too weak and still not enough. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 11:26, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Absolutely correct. However subject notability guidelines often provide a refutable presumption that sources will exist based on some additional criteria, and articles are often kept based on such additional criteria. Here, the additional criteria would be WP:GYMNAST. But what WP:SPORTCRIT says is that, when relying on such additional criteria, there must still be at least one IRS SIGCOV source actually on the page. This, it specifically says, does not show that the subject is notable, but it is a minimum requirement for anyone relying on the additional criteria in the subject notability guidelines. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:51, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Historical figure with unusually diverse accomplishments in gymnastics. Absolutely no BLP concern. Meets BASIC and HEY. Also, this article was created by User:Doma-w, not by User:Lugnuts! gidonb (talk) 05:43, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Where is the required SIGCOV source? How does he even meet BASIC when all the coverage is primary and/or non-independent? This and this and this are primary accounts by attendees or eyewitnesses, this is a passing mention... JoelleJay (talk) 17:23, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gidonb - "this article was created by User:Doma-w", which is why the nomination says "Lugstub-a-like". And as disucssed, multiple instances of IRS SIGCOV are required here. FOARP (talk) 09:48, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There are so many Lugstubs. Why at all invoke this if an article is unrelated to Lugnuts? gidonb (talk) 00:39, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Lots of keep !votes here, but unless I've missed it, no one's managed to find sigcov even still?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 04:46, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering The Netherlands Institute of Art History is a perfectly reliable, independent source. Schmitt´s biographical entry there provides significant information. That is one SIGCOV source. The article on the Dutch gymnastics team in London 1908, where Schmitt is signalled as the main culprit of the poor performance, was first published in the magazine of the Gymnastics Association, supposedly not an independent source, but then replicated in De Telegraaf, De Tijd, De Nieuwe Courant. They are independent, reliable sources. See also this discussion about, among other things, SIGCOV for topics over 100 years ago. The discussion also refers to WP:MULT to argue that redirect is not an option because Schmitt is notable for multiple events. I, for one, am extremely reluctant to delete lemma`s about people who lived over a century ago, for which we have indications that they are likely notable. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 16:12, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruud Buitelaar, that Netherlands Institute of Art History entry is a database entry, not sigcov. No comment on the others as whether a newspaper article is sigcov or not is up to the discussion participants. -- asilvering (talk) 16:27, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Per policy, non-independent coverage does not become independent simply by being republished elsewhere. WP:MULT is not a policy or guideline and so is not an appropriate !vote rationale. We had a massive global consensus requiring sportsperson bios cite IRS SIGCOV, regardless of how old the topic is or how difficult potential sources are to access. JoelleJay (talk) 20:48, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I striked my doubts and change to full Keep per WP:HEY and per WP:MULT as notable for multiple events indicated by Ruud Buitelaar. All coverage is from what I see reliable. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 20:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neither HEY nor MULT is a valid keep rationale. The article is required to cite a source of IRS SIGCOV. JoelleJay (talk) 20:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material. Out of the 300+ hits in Delpher, the article now has at least half a dozen of clippings from major Dutch newspapers in which Schmitt is mentioned, not in a trivial but in a significant way. I`d say we have more than enough SIGCOV. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 01:10, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sources must also be independent, reliable and secondary, of course. News reports are generally primary. For instance, this one [30] tells us about a picture he has drawn. That is, the reporter has looked at the image, and reports on what they saw. It is an eye witness account, and although we can infer from this that the subject was a good painter but not so much a poster maker, and that he drew this specific picture, all the biographical information clearly relies on us doing our own analysis of that eyewitness account. It is primary, and thus does not count towards notability on English Wikipedia. Dutch Wikipedia has different rules, so it may be fine there (although I see that it has very similar rules to us on original research), but English Wikipedia requires secondary sources. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they are listed as good arguments to make in deletion discussion. 95.98.65.177 (talk) 14:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I think there's enough info here considering that 1) the source material is foreign and limited and 2) it's over 100 years old. KatoKungLee (talk) 15:23, 8 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per expansion and the arguments of several others above. BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:46, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Hansen (pornographic actor)

AfDs for this article:

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

It doesn't seem like this one meets WP:GNG. The references are not SIGCOV and most of them don't seem like reliable sources. BuySomeApples (talk) 10:25, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:58, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been added to the WikiProject Pornography list of deletions.CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:01, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:05, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:06, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Doesn't look like the sources are significant coverage, and while I don't know if this recreated version is significantly different from the previously deleted version, it seems that the previous deletion nomination closed with the same finding and it is unlikely that much changed. silviaASH (inquire within) 12:16, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Following sources seem to be coverage significant enough, considering he has been featured in DNA magazine and made headlines in AVN and XBIZ:

Bright, Richard (2006-08-17). "Porn Star Q&A: Brian Hansen". AVN.
"Meet Brian Hansen". Fleshbot. 2006-04-25.
"COLT Launches Buckshot Man Brian Hansen's Fan Site". XBIZ. 2007-02-06
"BRIAN HANSEN The life and times and pajamas of porn's latest superstar". DNA. No. 81. January 2006.
"Brian Hansen's Grabby Snatch". DNA Magazine #90. July 2007. p. 10. Retrieved 2025-04-20 – via Scribd.
Rice, G. Zisk (2010-01-08). "Buckshot Man Brian Hansen Returns in 'Lotus'". AVN. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkavirya (talk • contribs) 12:59, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A cleanup could be done of unreliable sources, instead of deleting the entire article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arkavirya (talk • contribs) 13:08, 20 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The sources are too efficient (AVN) to justify keeping the article Iban14mxl (talk) 02:03, 27 April 2025 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 07:17, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we get a source eval?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 10:39, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, passes SIGCOV Madeline1805 (talk) 13:00, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NACTOR. Needs coverage in more independent sources than AVN and DNA. LibStar (talk) 13:53, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Benison (Beni · talk) 06:33, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Delete. The are all either not RS or not SIGCOV. Furthermore, the article is quite vague (e.g. "his parents were from two different continents") and certainly does not read as an encyclopaedic article. Overall, I'd say it could be saved if it wasn't for the questionable reliability of the sources, and the fact those are the best that seem to be available. JacobTheRox (talk) 06:52, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I believe there should be some coverage outside media only focused on the adult industry. That still leaves plenty of notable porn actors. gidonb (talk) 05:02, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Others

Requested Mergers

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Flag of Drenthe (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)
Flag of Flevoland (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)
Flag of Groningen (province) (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)
Flag of The Hague (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)
Flag of Weert (via WP:PROD on 19 March 2025)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Netherlands

Netherlands

Joan Willem Schreuder Jonkman

Niels ten Oever

PUSCII

Bospoldervos

20th Kisei

Johan Schmitt

Brian Hansen (pornographic actor)

Others

Requested Mergers

Categories

Deletion reviews

Miscellaneous

Proposed deletions

Redirects

Templates

See also