Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rune Øygard
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 no consensus. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:10, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Rune Øygard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Mayor of a town of 3,500 people who fails WP:POLITICIAN. Seems to have appeared in Norwegian press as a result of a sex scandal, however that is not a reason for having an article per WP:NOTNEWS and WP:ONEEVENT. Prod removed by page creator. Valenciano (talk) 07:34, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is the top news story of every media in Norway (Dagbladet, NRK, Aftenposten, VG etc). If this was an American mayor who the subject of this kind of media attention in national media, nobody would have attempted to have it deleted. Svein — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sveinkros (talk • contribs) 07:51, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete local news, written in local lang., not important for en.wikipedia at all. MaNeMeBasat (talk) 08:16, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The language in which stories about the subject are written is irrelevant. Being mayor of a municipality of 3,500 is in itself way below the threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia. Being accused of a sex crime is also not enough for WP, and he has not even been convicted WP:CRIMINAL. What happens in the US is happily not the determinant in an international encyclopedia; much time is spent in discussions explaining that to US based editors. So the issue has to be whether he passed the notability test prior to the criminal allegations. There are several suggestions in the article that he did so, because of his prominence on the national scene, but since I do not read Norwegian I am not in a position to find the right sources to establish whether that is correct. --AJHingston (talk) 08:53, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, I agree, written the same, only with a lot more words. MaNeMeBasat (talk) 09:32, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The municipality is a rather normal norvegian municipality. Rune Øygards importance was not only as its mayor, but of national fame in the Labour Party. Kingvald (talk) 10:49, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I am from Norway and don´t consider Øygard a national figure before this case. He was mainly known in his local area and within the Labour Party. His network included the prime minister, with whom he and the alleged victim had evening lunch once. There is a bit about the story in English here, written by a former employee in Aftenposten. (There is btw. a factual mistake in the Wikipedia article, as the mayor has not resigned but voluntarily agreed to a suspension until the criminal case is settled). Iselilja (talk) 09:30, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really see how anything in the article would be factually incorrect. A municipality can only have one mayor serving at a time and the current mayor is Iselin Jonassen. If you want to clarify exactly how he left his office as mayor in May this year, then go ahead. The link you cite[1] doesn't work, but I assume you mean this article[2], which says that he has been a fairly high-ranking figure within the Labour Party, not limited to his own region. He was also named "årets kommuneprofil" (municipal figure/politician of the year) by the Norwegian Association of Local and Regional Authorities, a major national organisation, in 2009. Apart from that, his criminal case takes up something like the first 5 pages of every major national newspaper every day now. If a US local politician, who happened to be someone described as a role model by President Obama, and who had been named US local politician of the year by some comparable major national organisation, got this kind of attention in The New York Times and other comparable newpapers, would we have this discussion? I don't think so. Sveinkros (talk) 14:15, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Øygard is on a paid leave from his position; Jonassen is acting mayor. I am going to correct the article if the decision is to keep it, but I don´t bother now. It doesn´t mean anything for the deletion discussion. I don´t have a strong opinion or whether the article should be kept or not. On Norwegian WIkipedia, which I know better, all mayors are automatically regarded as notable. The crime case Øygard is involved in is just briefly mentioned, though. I still don´t see Øygard as a national figure pre crime case, he hasn´t to my knowledge held any postion of importance outside his municipality. Not even at county level. But Norway is a small country and a severe crime case regarding a local politician may have some effect also on national politics (like the Medhaug case obviously hurt KrF). Iselilja (talk) 15:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I do not think we should worry too much about the importance of the post he held. In English Wikipedia, certain political posts do automatically confer notability but there is no suggestion that he qualifies under that criterion. Much more important, though, is his general notability and it is entirely possible for somebody holding only a minor post, or none at all, to gain general notability. If, for example, there were at least two articles in national or possibly regional media (not just a local newspaper) profiling him before the scandal broke that should be enough evidence of that. I think that the criminal allegations might well contribute to his notability for this purpose if it can be shown that it is his political standing or other notability that has made it such a prominent story (for a non-political example see eg the attention in the UK press currently to the allegations against the late Jimmy Saville) especially if that does indeed have consequences for his party. What I would not be happy about is for there to be an article about him only because of the alleged crime - he has not been convicted and even if he had he is not the first person to have engaged in this conduct and I am sure he will not be the last. Only in rare circumstances, such as assassinating a prime minister or killing a large number of people, do we create an article on somebody purely for doing something wrong. --AJHingston (talk) 16:47, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- The Norwegian Wikipedia had an article about him before the criminal case. In the newspaper archive Atekst, there were 44 articles about him in 2010 (the year before the scandal broke), including in national newspapers Aftenposten, Verdens Gang, Nationen, Dagsavisen, Stavanger Aftenblad, Dagbladet, Fædrelandsvennen, Vårt Land, Adresseavisen (in total, there are 667 newspaper articles about him indexed in Atekst). In a long article in Kommunal Rapport from 2009 (Kommunal Rapport 25.11.2009), Øygard's political archivements and national influence is discussed in detail. The article says that (Prime Minister) "Jens Stoltenberg has repeatedly highlighted Vågå. As recently as during last year's election campaign, the Prime Minister described Rune Øygard as his political role model." Another article in Kommunal Rapport is titled "Krav fra Jens' forbilde" (Demands from Jens' role model" (Kommunal Rapport 30.09.2009). It has been quite widely reported that he was declared by the Prime Minister to be his political role model some years ago. Sveinkros (talk) 18:36, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I do not think we should worry too much about the importance of the post he held. In English Wikipedia, certain political posts do automatically confer notability but there is no suggestion that he qualifies under that criterion. Much more important, though, is his general notability and it is entirely possible for somebody holding only a minor post, or none at all, to gain general notability. If, for example, there were at least two articles in national or possibly regional media (not just a local newspaper) profiling him before the scandal broke that should be enough evidence of that. I think that the criminal allegations might well contribute to his notability for this purpose if it can be shown that it is his political standing or other notability that has made it such a prominent story (for a non-political example see eg the attention in the UK press currently to the allegations against the late Jimmy Saville) especially if that does indeed have consequences for his party. What I would not be happy about is for there to be an article about him only because of the alleged crime - he has not been convicted and even if he had he is not the first person to have engaged in this conduct and I am sure he will not be the last. Only in rare circumstances, such as assassinating a prime minister or killing a large number of people, do we create an article on somebody purely for doing something wrong. --AJHingston (talk) 16:47, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Øygard is on a paid leave from his position; Jonassen is acting mayor. I am going to correct the article if the decision is to keep it, but I don´t bother now. It doesn´t mean anything for the deletion discussion. I don´t have a strong opinion or whether the article should be kept or not. On Norwegian WIkipedia, which I know better, all mayors are automatically regarded as notable. The crime case Øygard is involved in is just briefly mentioned, though. I still don´t see Øygard as a national figure pre crime case, he hasn´t to my knowledge held any postion of importance outside his municipality. Not even at county level. But Norway is a small country and a severe crime case regarding a local politician may have some effect also on national politics (like the Medhaug case obviously hurt KrF). Iselilja (talk) 15:11, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:45, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 18:48, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep under WP:GNG on the basis of the evidence provided by Sveinkros. --AJHingston (talk) 22:55, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 13:26, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Gongshow Talk 06:51, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - this is a notable topic that passes WP:GNG. It might be that the person Rune Øygard is not notable, and that this article could get a new name like "Trial against Rune Øygard", but until we know the outcome of the trial we should keep this article. Mentoz86 (talk) 22:10, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Renaming the article "Trial against Rune Øygard" is a good suggestion. Rune Øygard, albeit the mayor of a fairly small municipality, is a person who had some notability before the case as a long-time mayor who was highlighted by the Prime Minister as a role model, but the trial against him has turned into probably the largest case of the year in Norwegian media and outweighs his notability in other areas. Sveinkros (talk) 14:43, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep highly notable and on the cover of every major newspaper for a long time now. But even independent of the trial and accusations he would be notable. A search in Atekst shows 251 unique news stories with him before the current issue was covered by the press. He is not just a small-town major, but also former secretary general of Norges Bygdeungdomslag and has been a very prominent major, generating a good portion of media coverage over the years. Arsenikk (talk) 17:44, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - Wikipedia is not a battleground or a place for political propaganda. This "biography" in three easy steps: 1. mention Øygard was born; 2. tie him as close to the the Labour Party as possible: "Øygard has been described as a 'fairly high-ranking figure' within the Labour Party"; 3. Now quickly mention the accused crime to tie the Labour Party to the crime via Øygard: "In September 2011, he was indicted by Norwegian police of child sexual abuse." The article is not a biography on Rune Øygard but instead is a WP:COATRACK that discusses Crime accusuation against Rune Øygard to tie that crime to the Labour Party. The biography fails WP:GNG since the source material is about the crime event, not biography information about Øygard's life. Althought not at AfD, the crime event fails Wikipedia:Notability (events). Delete. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 09:11, 31 October 2012 (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.