Swainson’s Thrush

by | Feb 22, 2018 | Thrush

How Can We Help?
You are here:
< Back
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 speedy delete‎ with subject / author's consent. Also this is a BLP and this discussion was going nowhere productive. If an editor believes a redirect would be helpful, that can be done outside this discussion. Star Mississippi 23:07, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Claesson

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Samuel Claesson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable political candidate and author who made himself a Wikipedia page. Of the 6 articles cited on the page: 1 is the candidate list on the Alaska Divison of Elections website; one is a WP:ROTM article from Anchorage Daily News which has 1 sentence about Claesson; 1 is a page on "glamourgirlsofthesilverscreen.com" on which the only mention of Claesson is the inclusion of his book in a "recommended books" list; 1 is an article he wrote; 1 is a press release; and the final is a Los Angeles Times article by "Lawrence Graner" apparently written about him. Strangely enough, this article can't be found online, despite the fact that it was published in May 2023; the link in the citation leads to a paywalled Newspapers.com page, and I can't find any evidence that anyone by the name Lawrence Graner has ever written for the LA Times. Regardless, I don't think these cited articles are enough to determine notability; I can't find anything better on Google, and he doesn't seem to have any other claim to notability. I'd support a redirect to 2024 United States House of Representatives election in Alaska. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 04:09, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have started over 41 deletion discussions on Wikipedia, for politicians across the political spectrum. I guess that means my views don't align with literally any politician in existence. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This IP user has only ever made edits on this deletion discussion. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This Wikipedia account was created today. They have made 8 total edits, all on either Samuel Claesson's page or pages related to crime noir, which is the subject that Claesson writes about. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If you bothered doing "investigating" for yourself, Mr. IP user who is definitely not Samuel Claesson, you'd find that the page talked about in that article was deleted after numerous editors agreed that Manny Cid is not notable. The fact that you're spreading clearly bogus allegations from a random blogger shows how little credibility you have. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • It doesn't look like it should be deleted to me. You shouldn't classify something or somebody as 'non-notable' because you're unfamiliar with them. 1.177.147.27 (talk) 05:58, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This comment was this IP user's first ever edit. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • in addition, your staatement about www.glamourgirlsofthesilverscreen.com not mentioning him as being the nephew of Dennis Crosby is inaccurate. I just looked at the page and it clearly states it. Please examine these pages before flagging them. 1.177.147.29 (talk) 06:02, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right, my mistake. There is indeed a single sentence on that page mentioning that Samuel Claesson accepted an award on someone's behalf. I fail to see how that helps prove he's notable. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Another IP user who has only ever made edits on pages related to Samuel Claesson. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - WP:YOURSELF and WP:AUTOPROB Samuelrclaesson has his own user page for this content. Even at that, there is nothing in this article that makes him notable enough for a separate article, even if a non-involved editor wrote it. — Maile (talk) 13:21, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment As shown above, Samuel Claesson seems to have made multiple Wikipedia accounts to flood this discussion. He also left a threatening message on my talk page accusing me of being paid to delete Wikipedia accounts. His proof is a Facebook post from some random person who admits they "have no evidence of this." BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 20:29, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A few things:
    1. I didn't make multiple accounts. That's a lie.
    2. I didn't leave a threatening message. That's a lie.
    3. There is a lot more evidence that he's being paid to do this stuff, including an article that someone else posted a link to above. There are similar allegations made against him by moderators on his 'talk' page.
    4. I'd advise people to look at BottleOfChocolateMilk's 'talk' page and see the countless allegations of fraud, unprofessionalism, and bias that he has.
    5. I'm under the impression that BottleOfChocolateMilk doesn't have any authority or power in his life, so he's using Wikipedia as an outlet to feel powerful. The purpose of Wikipedia -and I've made a lot of articles- is to provide knowledge, not to boost someone's ego and compensate for their insecurities. I don't hate BottleOfChocolateMilk, but I certainly pity him. Samuelrclaesson (talk) 21:30, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
lol, "someone else" posted the link. Sure. Please do us a favor and summarize the "evidence" in that article (there isn't any). If there's "a lot more evidence" then surely you should be able to produce something. Or you could just keep threatening to tell the admins on me, which would probably result in you getting banned, not me. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 00:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I never "threatened to tell the admins" anything. If you're gonna threaten to get me banned, you should at least be truthful. I merely said that your 'talk' page has dozens of complaints from editors about your conduct. Samuelrclaesson (talk) 01:18, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know why you're trying to lie about this when anyone can look at my talk page (or this deletion discussion) and see what you said. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 17:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Fails WP:NPOL. No WP:SIGCOV to establish WP:GNG. Based on their editing behavior and behavior in this AfD, Samuelrclaesson should arguably be banned. Longhornsg (talk) 21:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete looking only at the article itself and doing a quick WP:BEFORE search, this article fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG. SportingFlyer T·C 16:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and others. Fails WP:NPOL and search shows no evidence of meeting WP:GNG. I think an SPI may also be warranted here; I agree it should be taken to ANI first though, which I may do soon if no one else does. On a bit of an unrelated note the content creator also seems to have made several other CoI creations. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 21:57, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    In response to AllTheUsernamesAreInUse... He's only chiming in because he's colluding with BottleOfChocolateMilk. If you see BottleOfChocolateMilk's 'talk' page, he and AllTheUsernamesAreInUse joke about being paid by a politician to edit Wikipedia. I'll be submitting information to ANI tonight about this, as this is not the way Wikipedia is supposed to be managed... long-time donors like myself hate seeing wannabe vigilantes like the two aforementioned individuals using Wikipedia as a way to give themselves authority and accomplishment that they lack in the real world. Samuelrclaesson (talk) 05:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The secret is out...Mary Peltola paid me to make this deletion discussion. I also got paid to start the 41 other deletion discussions I've created on Wikipedia. It's not much, but it's honest work. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 17:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Colluding", lol...and yes, it's a running joke between us because it didn't happen in real life. And ouch, "to give themselves accomplishment that they lack in the real world", be careful about personal attacks there. But yes, submit it to ANI, that would be a sensible course of action; I've little interest in arguing here. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 17:51, 8 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well I've notified ANI since I wasn't sure if anyone else was going to. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 17:51, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the page creator has now requested deletion, this seems like a speedy delete. BottleOfChocolateMilk (talk) 06:53, 9 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • the final is a Los Angeles Times article by "Lawrence Graner" apparently written about him. Strangely enough, this article can't be found online, despite the fact that it was published in May 2023; the link in the citation leads to a paywalled Newspapers.com page, and I can't find any evidence that anyone by the name Lawrence Graner has ever written for the LA Times I can see the newspaper article linked in the reference and it does not match the source definition (nor does it mention Claesson). If I go to the Los Angeles Times page/date specified in the source definition, there is no article about Claesson there. This appears to be a false source. Schazjmd (talk) 18:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Source fraud? That's a new one. AllTheUsernamesAreInUse (talk) 22:03, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Take this to WP:AN/I

That Samuelrclaesson should not have created Samuel Claesson is indisputable. But what I'm also seeing, are more serious allegations towards this editor. ANI requires evidence and diffs, not just accusations like we see on this page. BottleOfChocolateMilk you've made a lot of accusations, not the least of which is socking - i.e. creating multiple accounts. WP:AN/I is the place to sort this out, and where something can be done about any violations mentioned above. Longhornsg , if you believe the editor should be banned, then do something about it - don't just complain. Wikipedia:Banning policy will tell you how to put that process in motion. — Maile (talk) 01:33, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. I'll do the same. Samuelrclaesson (talk) 20:00, 6 July 2024 (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.
Categories
Table of Contents