Talk:Femi Oluwole

Trivial information
Regarding the recent text that I removed and that reinstated (without the courtesy of an explanation, I might add, as if my edits were vandalism), stating that Oluwole appeared on Good Morning Britain (diff) is trivial information and not worthy of encyclopedic inclusion. Since when was talking to Richard Madeley a notable activity? Stating that Oluwole goes on TV to "argue his case" and "catch people out" (diff) is banal, and adds nothing of note to the preceeding sentence. Stating that Oluwole received "abuse" because some people said a few unpleasant things (diff) is giving such comments unwarranted significance - people in the public eye routinely get trolled and insulted, but that doesn't mean recipients should have sections about it in their articles, particularly not under the section heading of "abuse", which is rather insulting to people who have experienced serious abuse. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 22:52, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I disagree; being called treacherous scum by a university academic is significant. As is having to explain European Law to a television presenter hosting a discussion on the EU. Happy to rename the 'abuse' section if we come to an agreement on a new name; but the fact that Oluwole keeps on fighting - despite the pushback from the leave campaign - is noteworthy. Jesswade88 (talk) 04:23, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
 * If an MP goes on morning television and explains something to the presenter, does that get covered in their Wikipedia article? It's scraping the bottom of the barrel, presumably done in this case because the article subject hasn't done a great deal that is notable. The university academic is not notable enough to have their own article and has not been charged wiuth anything or even disciplined as far as I am aware, so why is their view considered important? Having a section on "abuse" defines the article subject not as an active agent doing things in the world, but as a passive recipient of what other people have said. It trivialises the article subject. And it is not noteworthy that someone keeps doing what they were doing ("the fact that Oluwole keeps on fighting ... is noteworthy"). PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 09:39, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I think the "Abuse" subsection might need a less dramatic name, but the rest of the content looks fine to me. Disputes don't have to involve people who meet our (often peculiar) standards for wiki-notability in order to be worth mentioning in an article. TV appearances are the sort of thing we typically document in order to give a portrayal of activists' (and academics') careers. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 13:58, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
 * There was no dispute as far as I understand it - it was just insults. Not criticism or real abuse, just insults. On the matter of media appearances, I didn't remove the sentence that states "Oluwole is regularly in the media discussing Brexit, focusing on the details of European Union law and immigration policies", which seems fairly straightforward, but the subsequent text stating that he appears in order "to argue his case" and "catch out" those disagreeing with him is unnecessary (what else is he going to do - argue someone else's case?). And the example of 'explaining to Richard Madeley' is banal and adds nothing to what has just been said (that he regularly appears in the media). PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 10:55, 28 July 2019 (UTC)

Contested deletion
This page should not be speedily deleted because the article is well-referenced (coverage in the The Independent and The New European, for example) and demonstrated significant political activity of Oluwole over several years and in relation to more than one event. Klbrain (talk) 08:42, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Is this Femi?
When the news says Femi did this or Femi did that, is this the Femi that they are talking about? Op47 (talk) 22:44, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

I haven't edited it, but Referrence 3 and 24 are duplicates
Reference 3 and 24 (as of today, 20th August 2023) are duplicates, or at least different retrievals of the same article. GravitationalAnomaly (talk) 21:33, 20 August 2023 (UTC)


 * ✅. I thought there was something that was meant to fix things like that automatically but maybe I'm mistaken. Anyway, I've combined them into one. Thanks for letting us know. DanielRigal (talk) 23:31, 20 August 2023 (UTC)