Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Karl Axel Lind

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 delete. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:56, 31 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Karl Axel Lind

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

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

In over 4 years we still only have a collection of primary or trivial sources, some of which are broke.) Slatersteven (talk) 13:03, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:30, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:30, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:30, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Tyw7 (🗣️ Talk) — If (reply) then (ping me) 14:30, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per this presumably reliable source, modern reflexologists base their techniques on other people, not Lind. Given the lack of reliable sourcing in the article, and a reference I just found that said that only 3 people worldwide were authorized to perform his techniques (or something to that effect), I don't see any way to keep it.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:47, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per SarekOfVulcan. -- Gprscrippers (talk) 18:33, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per User:SarekOfVulcan. No mention of Lind in a reliable source on the background of the practice is a bad sign for the purported "father of Nordic reflexology". Nanophosis (talk) 04:06, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:SNOW delete failure to find sources that establish notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 11:22, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The sources that are supposedly Swedish and online are actually 404 Not Found. I'll admit I can't read Finnish, but the supposedly Finnish ones look extremely primary just from the look of them. (Footnote 7, which is online, is actually an Estonian — not Finnish — dissertation on the causes of colic in babies, and doesn't mention Lind AFAICS.) Google also doesn't find any secondary sources for the theory that Lind is claimed to have originated, "full-body reflexology". In primary source pseudoscienceland it's clearly a thing, though: see here for how you can open your own QC Reflexology location, get a certificate, etc. Bishonen | talk 21:04, 25 August 2018 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. Not a notable crank. Guy (Help!) 21:57, 25 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Could not find sources in English papers or in my pseudoscience related books collection, indicating that the article fails WP:NBIO. —Paleo Neonate – 01:51, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: A WP:SPA article by Arve Fahlvik, with a probable WP:COI. Much of the article content is essentially an apology for a lack of core publications by the subject. Insufficient evidence provided or found to establish biographical notability. AllyD (talk) 12:57, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The wafer-think claims to notability are unsourced, despite the article's WP:Editorializing and doing its best to puff the subject.GirthSummit _(blether) 18:20, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can we snow this?Slatersteven (talk) 18:22, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why? It's been a full week, it can get a regular close without invoking WP:SNOW... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:26, 30 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because of that reason, it has not been closed.Slatersteven (talk) 07:39, 31 August 2018 (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.