Talk:B. S. Christiansen

This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the `\|auto=` parameter.

Denmark Low‑importance

	Denmark portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Denmark, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Denmark on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DenmarkWikipedia:WikiProject DenmarkTemplate:WikiProject DenmarkDenmark
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

AFAIK B.S. Christiansen has never taken any education as a US Navy SEAL, although he has attended the US ranger shool. See his official homepage for details: [1]. --neckelmann 16:05, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blindly adding {{references}} to every stub is not helping, very few stubs have references, and very few stubs put in information that is traditionally referenced in articles with references. If there is some specific claim you want references, add {{fact}} after that claim.--Per Abrahamsen 19:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blindly adding {{references}} to every stub is not helping

True, but since I haven't done that, there's no point in saying that.

very few stubs have references

And those are the ones that get deleted pretty quickly.

If there is some specific claim you want references, add {{fact}} after that claim.

That would be THE ENTIRE ARTICLE, hence the use of the tag. I repeat, for the SECOND time, there are NO sources/references AT ALL except the self-reference. --Calton | Talk 21:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of mentioning something that is TOTALLY OBVIOUS (thus making the tag TOTALLY USELESS) again, why not answer my question? What facts in the stub needs references? I could add zillions of links to (mostly Danish language) articles that would contribute nothing to the article, but that would just be link spam.--Per Abrahamsen

Notability

If you want to argue the notability of BS Christiansen, do it here. Don't readd the template without arguing in the talk page, that is rude and unhelpful (the template is good for getting someones attention, not for a discussion). I feel that the fact that links on other pages would turn red is argument enough, what else do you want? 70000 Google hits? Or that he is trainer for the top rated professional bike racing team? Or his 28 entries IMDb? --Per Abrahamsen 19:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't readd the template without arguing in the talk page

The template IS the argument: who the hell IS this guy?

You know, the more you dodge the obvious questions and rely on irrelevancies and wikilawyering, the less I think is there. Address the issues or the next stop is WP:AFD. --Calton | Talk 21:57, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I gave five arguments for notability. Your only counter-argument until now has been "I don't care". Please set up the article for deletion. Those people usually give better arguments than "who the hell IS the guy".--Per Abrahamsen 01:28, 23 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Notability (again)

I added {{notability}} and {{BLP sources}} because the only source mentioned in the page is a link to the article subject's website and the actual article currently does not say clearly why this man is notable. The first five results in a Google search for B. S. Christiansen shows one link to this article, a link to the Danish Wikipedia article, a link to his website, another link to his website and a link to a Danish Facebook page. Per WP:GNG, articles must have significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, alright there are some mentions of the man on Danish websites, but - with some help from Google translate - these appear to be more TV interviews or gossip magazines which may not meet the reliable source part of WP:GNG and they almost definitely don't meet the significant coverage part and the single link to the man's website currently in the page definitely doesn't meet the independent of the subject part. The page also claims he is a celebrity in his home country [Denmark], this is a large claim not backed up by sources or web searches (a "celebrity" would have many more Google search results than what he has currently - by my understanding of the word anyway). I also believe that Mr Christiansen does not meet WP:BASIC. I'm looking for someone else's opinion here, get a bit of a discussion going. Thanks. Seagull123 Φ 02:24, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I'm not saying he isnt notable (per WP:N, WP:BIO or WP:GNG), it's just that if someone believes he is notable - prove it. I'm not having much luck proving his notability anyway. Seagull123 Φ 02:28, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a few sources I believe lend credibility to his notability. (One of which is profile about him from Berlingske, one of the large Danish newspapers.) I've also added a IMDb reference. As a Danish person, I can agree to the claim that he is quite well-known in Denmark, and has had a number of TV-shows, usually focusing on his military training. E.g. one where he takes Danish TV-show/children's show host "Bubber" into the wilderness and the likes. The article could definitely do with some expansion, but I believe the content to be sound, and for him to be notable. ∫e^b²+1_(talk) 16:51, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]