Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonas Torsvik

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Jonas Torsvik}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Jonas Torsvik}})

Cannot find any independent WP:SIGCOV for this Norwegian footballer, just trivial mentions in routine game coverage and brief transfer coverage. Fails WP:GNG/WP:NSPORT. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC) Update: withdrawn. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:09, 20 January 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Football, and Norway. Dclemens1971 (talk) 03:21, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
• Draftify – WP:TOOSOON. Svartner (talk) 06:33, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
• I draftified it earlier. Not much was done with the page before it was reintroduced. There is a time and place for everything, and ultra-quick stubs about footballers are probably not the best idea for Wikipedia going forward. Here is coverage from one of Bergen's newspapers: [https://www.ba.no/drommescoring-etter-skademareritt-det-er-noe-med-den-gutten/s/5-8-2272571] [https://www.ba.no/den-scoringen-der-er-sa-deilig-at-jeg-nesten-ikke-har-sett-maken/s/5-8-2304416] [https://www.ba.no/to-18-aringer-i-forsvaret-na-ma-vi-vare-litt-forsiktige/s/5-8-2319094] [https://www.ba.no/forundret-horneland-trodde-ikke-han-var-klar-for-det/s/5-8-2366459] [https://www.ba.no/raste-mot-landslagsuttaket-na-er-backtalentet-skadet/s/5-8-2375572] [https://www.ba.no/brann-juveler-pa-utgaende-kontrakt-n-vil-forlenge-n-vil-vente/s/5-8-2383893] [https://www.ba.no/unggutten-har-forlenget-brann-kontrakten/s/5-8-2481375] [https://www.ba.no/brann-talentet-langt-unna-han-er-ikke-i-trening/s/5-8-2562543] [https://www.ba.no/jonas-torsvik-er-endelig-tilbake-pa-banen-for-brann/s/5-8-2771829] They are paywalled, but it should be clear that the coverage is about him and not match reports. From those alone, it should be possible to write something decent-sized. (Greater Bergen) also has other press outlets.) I believe deletion is out of the question; the options would be another draftification or taking a stab at the Heymann standard. Geschichte (talk) 08:50, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
• :@Geschichte That Bergen newspaper's paywall is so strict, at least in my country, that I can't even see the headline without a subscription, so I have literally no way of verifying what these might say about Torsvik. All content on the page is obscured until logged in. If you believe these are SIGCOV, however, I'm willing to withdraw the nomination per WP:NEXIST. I agree it should not be draftified. Speedy keep Dclemens1971 (talk) 14:26, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:06, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
• Keep per Geschichte's sources above which (apparently) show notability. Happy to AGF here. GiantSnowman 19:12, 20 January 2025 (UTC)
• Keep - Per above. {{Ping|Dclemens1971}}, withdraw and close this discussion. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 11:45, 21 January 2025 (UTC)
• :@Das osmnezz I cannot unilaterally close my withdrawn nomination per WP:NACD unless all other votes are for “keep”. Dclemens1971 (talk) 11:47, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

:::{{Ping|Svartner}}, See above. Thanks, Das osmnezz (talk) 12:11, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

::::I'm neutral, drafting would give more time to make adjustments, but it could be considered a weak keep too. Svartner (talk) 12:32, 21 January 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.