Talk:Ólafur Gunnarsson
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
There is a possible conflict of interest in the fact that the author of this article is the English translator of several of Gunnarsson's books. Dwmcduff (talk) 16:20, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
I am wondering what the status of this article is at the present time. It was reviewed briefly and rejected on the grounds of insufficient references and problems of verification. I have attempted to address these, but have so far received no further response from editors. Dwmcduff (talk) 10:58, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Comments by author moved from the main age of the draft
editI am willing to supply more sources, and will endeavour to do so. Dwmcduff (talk) 07:12, 2 May 2017 (UTC) -
I have now increased the number of sources, so that most of the bio-bibliographical information about the subject is verifiable.Dwmcduff (talk) 06:39, 3 May 2017 (UTC)Dwmcduff (talk) 06:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
The applied notability standards as outlined here are opaque to me. Therefore regretfully I will have to withdraw this proposed entry,and discontinue work on it It's a pity, as Gunnarsson is a notable Icelandic author already well represented in Icelandic and German Wikipedia. English-speaking readers also deserve to be introduced to his work. Perhaps another Wikipedia contributor will have more success than I appear to have done. Thank you both for your cooperation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.140.1.179 (talk • contribs)
Draft accepted
editDespite the sometimes misdirected zeal of some draft reviewers, there is no requirement for perfection for an article to be posted in Wikipedia. As for drafts, it is far better to accept them when they are good enough and give them a chance to get improved later than to make authors leave in frustration.
I accepted the draft. In my judgment it is good enough (and better than many mainspace articles) and notability is clear enough that this article would be unlikely to get deleted had it been posted directly into main article space. If either of the previous reviewers (SwisterTwister and Waggie) is unhappy with my decision to accept the draft, they are welcome to test my assumption by taking the article to WP:AFD. --Hegvald (talk) 23:27, 4 June 2017 (UTC)