Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Afusat Saliu


 * 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 Merge into female genital mutilation and convert to a redirect to that article. This one took a while to consider, which may be why it was left open for so long. While the numbers lean delete, this is a classic case of the strengths of arguments making the case, rather than the numbers. As for Afusat, no one has provided a strong argument to counter the BLP1E concerns. It is all she is known for. On the other hand, the event is noteworthy and documented. That doesn't necessarily make it notable according to Wikipedia standards (ie: a rename would likely be insufficient). Many of the deletes and even the nom mentioned merging, so it seems clear the issue isn't with the information, but is instead with it being a stand alone article. It also makes sense that someone might search for that term, and they will at least get to the entire article or the subsection that covers this woman. Being noteworthy, it is worth inclusion somewhere else, where it will arguably have more impact and add more value to the reader. If events change and Saliu's status changes as to notability, there should be no prejudice against an article being recreated, but at this time the arguments fall on the side of merging. I have converted to a redirect, and will leave the merging to the actual editors of the articles, who can use the article history for material. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; WER  14:50, 14 June 2014 (UTC)

Afusat Saliu

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Originally deleted as WP:CSD because the article failed to assert significance and the sources focused more on a petition and movement rather than the person. Deletion review consensus is that the article should be taken to AFD and evaluated against WP:BLP1E, which says we should avoid having articles on people who are known in the context of a single event. Because this is a short article and unlikely to generate much further coverage because the this person's deportation date has passed since the coverage, it may be better to use this information to expand female genital mutilation instead. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:39, 31 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep They won a last-minute reprieve a few days ago, but their eventual fate remains uncertain, this case has generated quite a bit of publicity and could run and run. PatGallacher (talk) 18:19, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * But is the coverage really about the person, or about the petition/movement? Regardless, this is still a WP:BLP1E situation. ~Amatulić (talk) 19:07, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 31 May 2014 (UTC) )
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:48, 31 May 2014 (UTC)


 * WP:BLP1E says that it only applies to low-profile individuals. Afusat Saliu is not a low-profile individual: she's given an interview to The Guardian (evidence).  Therefore WP:BLP1E is out of bounds.  WP:BIO1E, however, is available: this is a person who is only notable for one event.  We could rename the article to deportation of Afusat Saliu, although I must say that I think Afusat Saliu is the most plausible search term so it would need to be kept as a redirect.  I agree that the coverage of this lady in the Guardian, The Independent and the BBC could be used to expand the FGM article as well, but this does not preclude having an article about the person.  The fact that 120,000 people have signed a petition to keep her in the UK and this is reported in several major national news sources does rather strongly imply that we ought not to have a redlink here.— S Marshall  T/C 02:56, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm so torn between keep and delete that I can't put either !vote in bold. So, I'll say move to Deportation of Afusat Saliu, or whatever, keeping the redirect, following S Marshall's suggested possibility. At present it's a pseudo-biography, as deprecated by WP:BIO1E, but I see the reason we do not have these is so as to avoid harm. However, in this case I'm far from seeing what harm we would be avoiding by changing the title. Thincat (talk) 18:09, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete. Delete on the grounds of WP:TOOSOON in conjunction with WP:BLP1E. She might eventually be notable enough for an article, even based on just this one event, but not yet. Paisarepa (talk) 10:49, 3 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Afusat and her daughters have now been deported to Nigeria but there is continued media interest in her since the deportation, for example an article in the Guardian Online on 3rd June 2004 (The Guardian). The family is still proceeding with a judicial review, so there will be more media coverage in the near future as that process gets under way.  The issue has also been extended beyond simply that of FGM, as there is now concern about the possibility of Boko Haram getting involved because of Afusat's conversion to Christianity (also reported in the referenced Guardian article), so simply extending the article on female genital mutilation would not be sufficient. MrUK1953 (talk) 08:29, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a classic example of one event. If it is kept, the article needs to go through very major revisions. Currently it is the worst attack article I have ever seen. Calling things "unfounded, unreasonable" and going on from there is attack language, not encyclopedic language. The whole tone of the article is just not acceptable for Wikipedia.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:09, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete -- A classic case of a "famous for 15 minutes". This is a case where some one has got journalists attention  and got a case into the papers.  FGM is obnoxoius, but not obviously notable.  Peterkingiron (talk) 19:48, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep but rename to event article "Deportation of..." for example. The event is notable, the person not so much. Hobit (talk) 20:16, 7 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, after rename, keep a redirect to it. Hobit (talk) 20:18, 7 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete &mdash; notwithstanding disagreement over the "letter of the law" with regard to whether WP:BLP1E applies (and realistically, we should prolly err on the side of caution even if someone's given an interview), WP:BIO1E is still an issue. Furthermore, if converting it to an event, this reeks of WP:NOT and seems to fail event notability (including no demonstrated lasting effects, limited geographic scope, not really that significant in quantity, lack of diversity in sources, and proportionately short duration of coverage). At best it might be merge-able to Female genital mutilation or a related list of sorts detailing events that have made a headline or two but aren't exactly encyclopedic in and of themselves. -- slakr \ talk / 04:22, 12 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Rename or Delete : She's not notable based on Wikipedia standards but the event seems notable. Darreg (talk) 02:24, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
 * 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.