Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johanne Rask Arnesen

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was Delete. Eugene van der Pijll 21:11, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Johanne Rask Arnesen

Delete. Seems like a blatant vanity page. As a model, its not good to have zero results on Google Image Search, and the only results in Google are copies of this wikipedia article. WoodenTaco 02:37, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

This orphaned and malformed nomination re-submitted by me. No vote. jni 08:50, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Expand. Certainly not every individual should have an entry in Wikipedia. But some do. I would think that there are a variety of traits or situations that would make a personal article appropriate.
• Examples:

  Affects history: Nikola Tesla, Benjamin Franklin, Adolf Hitler, Linus Torvalds

  Is a significant part of popular culture: Oprah Winfrey, Will Rogers, Robert Service, Jesse Jackson

  Is extraordinary in some way: The Elephant Man, Marilyn VosSavant, June Wilkinson, Robert Wadlow, Angus McGasgill, Robert Hughes

  The sisters Helene Rask and Johanne Rask Arnesen seem to fall into this last category.

• Certainly there are other reasons for inclusion of an article, but these examples are, I believe, sufficient to justify this article's inclusion and its expansion.
• A Google search searches a small part of current knowledge and an even smaller part of human culture, a searchable subset of The Internet. The publically-searchable part of The Internet is not the only news medium, the only communications mechanism or the only fountain of knowledge. People still read books, still talk directly with each other, still eat, still worry and still love. The results of a Google search are less important that has been implied. Physical reality has not gone away simply because of the advent of cyberspace. User:au@xmission.com 09:40, 1 June 2005 (UTC) (No such user. 166.70.38.67 08:45, 2005 Jun 1 according to edit history. Uncle G 23:23, 2005 Jun 1 (UTC))
• Delete. Vanity. Jamyskis 12:23, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, an unknown model does not affect history, nor make up a significant part of pop culture, and is not extraordinary in some way. --bainer (talk) 08:58, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - one of dozens of non-famous models - Skysmith 10:51, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Moment of cynicism: I wonder if this would have generated more keep votes if it had included a picture? --Scimitar 16:21, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per bainer. As a model you need to be nationally known to get an Wikipedia article in my opinion. Mgm|^(talk) 16:37, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
• By presenting no actual evidence whatever, from the "physical reality" that xe handwaves about, that Johanne Rask Arnesen is "extraordinary in some way", 166.70.38.67 makes a good argument for deleting this article. And all that remains is Johanne Rask Arnesen's name, place and date of birth, sex, siblings (a Wikitree genealogy entry thus far), and that someone (solely the author of the article, for all we know) reckons her to be a major talent. Delete. Uncle G 23:23, 2005 Jun 1 (UTC)
• Delete not notable. --Etacar11 00:11, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Vanity - The historical record can replace this single line arty after judicious deliberation for, oh -- at least ten years - She will then be 31 and have made an impact as a model, or be a mother with stretch marks or whatever. Fabartus 00:31, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.