Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ayo Sogunro


 * 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   no consensus. There are sufficient sources to make it plausible the subject meets criterion #3 of WP:AUTHOR or not, and there's no consensus as to whether it's the case. Thus, by neither policy nor headcount, nor their marriage, can a consensus be obtained. Wily D 16:52, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Ayo Sogunro

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject fails WP:GNG; The references cited, despite being mostly unreliable, are links to articles he's written. None is focused on his person. Google didn't bring up relevant result on this subject either. Jamie Tubers (talk) 03:22, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent|lambast 04:45, 13 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. lavender|(formerlyHMSSolent|lambast 04:47, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Keep. Reasons for opposing this deletion: 1. The subject is a known African author with three books published and of sufficient interest to an average African and Nigerian audience and discussed in reliable sources as indicated by cited references. 2. A google web search brings up about 32,600 results at the date of this entry contrary to the nominator's assertion. 3. Contrary to the nominator's assertion, Out of the 20 references cited, only one of these links to an article by the subject, others are from external sources including a BBC report, an AlJazeera report and an interview by Ebony Magazine. It is critical that an average African and world audience has access to critical information on modern contributors to African literature. --Redotec (talk) 15:28, 13 October 2014 (UTC) — Shecrownlita (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Keep. I am a member of the Nigerian literary community and I think this page is culturally relevant. I have contributed to this page previously. The reasons provided for nominating its deletion are factually untrue. --GrimyMartin (talk) 16:10, 13 October 2014 (UTC) — GrimyMartin (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Delete. This subject of this article has written for a number of notable newspapers in Nigeria. However, he has not received significant coverage in reliable sources. The accolades he has garnered are not notable. The books he has written are not notable because they do not meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines to warrant a stand alone article. The amount of web search one gets doesn't translate to notability. Most of the webpages in the web search do not show notability. I suspect a case of sockpuppetry going on here. Redotec and GrimyMartin edited this discussion on the same day and relatively the same time period. I won't be suprised if they are confirmed as socks.  V e r s a c e 1 6 0 8 (Talk) 17:37, 13 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I'm a newbie, learning the ropes, be kind. I think the aspect of notability here should be about verifiability not popularity; while factoring the paucity of information on contemporary Nigerian writers. You concede that the subject of the article is verifiable as a contemporary Nigerian writer, but you are not satisfied with his popularity. If we should go by that test, then Wikipedia would have only two or three articles on contemporary writers from Nigeria. Proof here that the subject of this article is "regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by peers or successors" is evidenced by his participation at the 2014 Ake Book Festival. Generally, I think a deletion of the article page is a very radical solution for an issue of popularity.--GrimyMartin (talk) 07:56, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
 * as an aside, I'm keen on improving the dozens of stubs on Nigerian writers Category:Nigerian_writer_stubs. Your assistance here is welcome.--GrimyMartin (talk) 08:19, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I didn't say anything about popularity. The subject of this article fails WP:GNG because he has not been discussed in reliable secondary sources. It is as simple as that. One's popularity doesn't make them notable on Wikipedia.  V e r s a c e 1 6 0 8 (Talk) 11:14, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

The accusation of sockpuppetry by User:Versace1608 is selectively biased as all discussions for and against this deletion have been made on the same day and relatively in the same time period. The other objections are based on User:Versace1608's private opinion on the value of the subject's literary worth and not on the facts. As such, the opinion is better inserted into the article page if facts support it. Mere personal opinions (such as those expressed above) of the subject's literary value are not adequate for a deletion. As a fact, the subject's most recent book was rated as a top 15 Nigerian book in 2013 by a major tv channel THE TOP I5 NIGERIAN BOOKS IN 2013. Furthermore, user User:Versace1608's statement that the subject has written for a number of newspapers is also factually incorrect. The subject runs a private blog which is syndicated among online media, More factually, he has been notably quoted in major newspapers in Nigeria: Letter to Wole Soyinka: Ayo Sogunro replies Sadiq Abacha - See more at: http://www.vanguardngr.com/2014/03/open-letter-wole-soyinka-ayo-sogunro-replies-sadiq-abacha/#sthash.Vw5TLKuK.dpuf; consistently interviewed by foreign media on Nigerian affairs #BringBackOurGirls: Nigeria's Outrage over Boko Haram; and a known advocate of sexual minority rights in Nigeria Accolades, rebuke trail anti-gay law and for which he has been attacked several times after his outspoken defence for the rights of gay Nigerians Nigeria Legislates Against Gay Marriage, Advocacy. I suspect the attempts to have his wikipedia entry deleted are a continuation of the attacks against his widely known pro-gay views in Nigeria, part of the internet "veil of silence" against Nigerian gay rights writers.--Redotec (talk) 22:58, 13 October 2014 (UTC)


 * (aka Redotec) Please do not make that assumption. His views on sexuality has nothing to do with Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not biased in any way whatsoever. There are tons of LGBT related articles on Wikipedia. I don't want you to think that the subject's personal views on sexuality is the reason behind this article going through the AFD process. I applaud the subject for raising awareness and showing support for same sex equality in his native country. The reason why I believe this article should be deleted is because the subject simply has not received significant coverage in reliable sources. The subject has not been discussed in significant detail. Perhaps he may be notable in the near future, but as of right now, he isn't. I may be wrong about about you being a sockpuppet but until I am proven wrong, I stand by my initial intuition.  V e r s a c e 1 6 0 8 (Talk) 01:11, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Delete: Sadly, no evidence of notability. Lack of significant coverages to independent, secondary reliable sources. It fails WP:GNG. Wikicology (talk) 00:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep I found significant coverage: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. - Takeaway (talk) 03:45, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment: none of the sources you found discusses the subject....However, this, this, and this are related to the subject, but they only discuss one of his works and not the author. It's a bit tricky as some of Ayo's works have received significant coverage. However, according to wiki, notability of works doesn't automatically make the author notable. this link contains one of the short biographies (about him) written on each of the guest writers who attended an event....this in no way establishes notability,....for the same reason we cannot say the other guests at the event, listed here are all notable....--Jamie Tubers (talk) 17:25, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * What we are here for is to discuss the article subject's notability. If a writer has their book(s) favourably reviewed in leading newspapers, it would seem that the writer is notable. The Union even calls him "one of Nigeria’s most creative youth". The Nation write "The combination of poetry and prose in narrative style shows that Sogunro is an author with deep understanding of the art of writing. ...serves as his own forte and style spell him out as a force to reckon with as a literary genius." Japheth J. Omojuwa, who is ranked 29th in the list of most influential black people on digital and social media alongside Barack Obama, Beyoncé, and Oprah Winfrey, apparently takes the trouble to write about Ayo Sogunro that "On Monday, March 31, 2014, controversial Nigerian essayist and writer, Ayo Sogunro will be reading in London, United Kingdom from his book, The Wonderful Life of Senator Boniface and other Sorry Tales at an event organized by the prestigious Royal African Society ("RAS")." I don't think non-notable writers are invited to read there? In this article about gay rights in Nigeria Project MUSE specifically names him as one of the notable people on this subject in Nigeria. The rest of the links show that his opinions apparently matter in Nigeria as it seems that they affect many people in such a way that they reflect on these views. If he was not notable, this wouldn't be the case. - Takeaway (talk) 18:05, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * It still doesn't change the fact that the subject has only received mentions. No article explains him in detail.....Definition of "significant coverage" according to WP:GNG, clearly states: "...addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material". This is makes it clear that the subject of this article hasn't received significant coverage. The least that can be done for this subject is talk about him in LGBT rights in Nigeria. It presently isn't notable enough to warrant a stand alone page on wikipedia. Notability isn't inherited from notable works.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 18:21, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * He is notable per WP:AUTHOR. - Takeaway (talk) 18:33, 16 October 2014 (UTC)


 * He partially meets criteria 1 of WP:AUTHOR. I say partially because being cited by few people doesn't equate to "widely" as outline in criteria 1. As a matter of fact, the Notability (people) article doesn't specifically state that meeting one requirement of WP:AUTHOR is sufficient for passing the said guideline. I don't think this is enough considering the fact that he doesn't meet WP:GNG. Just as Tubers pointed, being invited to participate at a book reading or hanging around notable writers doesn't establish notability on Wikipedia.  V e r s a c e 1 6 0 8 (Talk) 19:25, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * plus, the book reading was for the book he authored for that matter.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 19:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Criteria 1 would be the case for his "I am corrupt because I am Nigerian" essay I think, which has been widely cited and/or criticised online and also in a few articles, which although not a true indication of WP notability, is inherent of his modus operandi, being very active in social media as a commentator on Nigerian culture and values. And I think he actually meets criteria 3 most of all: The person has created....a significant or well-known work....that has been the subject of....independent periodical articles or reviews. having two of Nigeria's leading newspapers write about his book, and notable others regarding it as significant, isn't bad I think? Which leads to criteria 4c: he has won critical attention. And WP:AUTHOR is not to be seen as additional criteria to GNG, but as specific criteria for creative professionals. If they are notable per WP:AUTHOR, they are notable per GNG. In WP:Notability (people), of which WP:AUTHOR is a subsection, it actually states: People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. Thebook reading was at a very prestigious institute (RAS). You don't just get invited there if you're a nobody. - Takeaway (talk) 19:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't think the book is well known! A well known book is a book like Half of a Yellow Sun or Harry Potter, not this; I don't even know the name. And it hasn't received MULTIPLE independent PERIODICAL articles or reviews...just FEW! critical attention? how many critics or scholars have analyzed this book, please? And Royal African Society (RAS) isn't "PRESTIGIOUS". It is infact hardly notable. And contrary to your belief, anybody can be a member, as it is clearly stated here. --Jamie Tubers (talk) 20:52, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't really know how many notable book review magazines/newspapers there are in Nigeria. Having two leading newspapers writing glowing reviews about a non-fiction book, which indeed is not a blockbuster book such as Harry Potter, sounds significant to me. It's like a notable art film, which also can not be put into the same category as, well, Harry Potter films. They have much smaller audiences, and do not rake in as much money if any. The criteria says significant or well-known. According to the two leading newspapers it is significant. That it is not well-known is a pity.
 * Yes indeed, anyone who is interested can become a member of the RAS which is a good thing. But not everyone is asked to speak there. Here is what the RAS says about itself: "The Royal African Society is Britain's prime Africa organisation. Now more than 100 years old, its in-depth, long-term knowledge of the continent and its peoples makes the Society the first stop for anyone wishing to know more.". This is who normally are invited to speak there: "We often get famous professors on stage for our meetings but they are not often joined by the scion of South Africa’s richest family, a rock star and the head of the British army." Here is the page mentioning the members of the council of the RAS with the Queen herself as patron, and in that capacity, kind of a member (they're not just a bunch of well-meaning amateurs and having the Queen herself as patron does make it quite prestigious as a British society). And here is what Ayo Sogundo did there (not just a book reading but he was also invited as a speaker on LGBT rights in Nigeria.
 * "Critical attention" means that critics have read it and given it attention. And the book reading at the RAS also counts as critical attention I think? - Takeaway (talk) 21:16, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

He fails criteria 3 of WP:AUTHOR because the book he wrote is not significant or well known. Having two Nigerian newspapers write a short length review is not significant. Wikipedia is all about reliable sources and extensive courage. If you think his books are "significant", try creating articles about them and see the outcome. Being invited to speak at events is not enough to warrant a stand alone article. The fact of the matter is that the subject has not gained significant coverage in reliable sources. The sources currently cited in the article does not establish notability. Anyone who has not been discussed in significant detail through independent reliable sources shouldn't have a stand alone article on Wikipedia. It is as simple as that.  V e r s a c e 1 6 0 8 (Talk) 22:21, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Is that so? That glowing reviews in two leading newspapers in Nigeria of a Nigerian book do not make that book significant. Nor the author being called "a genius" and "one of Nigeria’s most creative youth". Should the New York Times have reviewed this Nigerian book perhaps? Where else would one need to see book reviews in Nigeria may I ask? To make this book and therefore the author notable? - Takeaway (talk) 22:26, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * You need to stop saying "leading" newspapers. I can argue that of those three newspapers, only The Nation is credible. There's not much information about the editorial staff and publication history of the remaining two. They are not even listed in the List of newspapers in Nigeria article. There are tons of authors who have been called a "genius" or "one of the most creative youth in their country". Being praised is not enough to warrant a stand alone article.  V e r s a c e 1 6 0 8 (Talk) 22:51, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, I was under the impression that "The Union" was a notable newspaper. I am not sure which is the third one you refer to. So what I did instead was look up what were actually popular media in Nigeria and I found this website with a top 20. I have no idea how they arrived at this top 20 but it is what I followed. starting at number 1. Vanguard (Nigeria): mentioned as "writer and critique Ayo Sogunro" 2. The Punch: Ayo Sogunro cited, Ayo Sogunro mentioned as lawyer, Ayo Sogunro cited 3. Sahara Reporters: Ayo Sogunro's open letter to Sadiq Abacha posted 5. Nigerian Tribune: Ayo Sogunro extensively quoted 6. The Nation (Nigeria): Ayo Sogunro mentioned as speaker 7. Thisday: Ayo Sogunro quoted 10. Naij: Open letter to Sadiq Abacha published 15. Channels TV: Channels Book Club interview with three writers, one of them Ayo Sogunro, on his book "The Wonderful Life Of Senator Boniface And Other Sorry Tales" 19. Online Nigeria News: Open letter to Sadiq Abacha published 20. Information Nigeria: Open letter to Sadiq Abacha published.
 * 7 from the top 10 all mention Ayo Sogunro. And just one open letter of his gets published in several top 20 Nigerian news sites. And he's still not notable enough for a standalone article?
 * I still don't know which notable Nigerian literary review magazines his book needs to be reviewed in for you so that it is seen as notable.
 * In WP:Notability (people) it reads: "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability". It would seem that with the aforementioned, and the above-mentioned book reviews, and also being invited as a speaker at the RAS which normally invites "famous professors", and being regarded as an expert on the legalities of LGBT rights in Nigeria by Project MUSE, would seem sufficient to establish Ayo Sogunro's notability. - Takeaway (talk) 00:46, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The subject of this article is not notable. None of the sources you cited discusses him in detail. As stated earlier in this discussion, the "subject runs a private blog which is syndicated among online media." Just because his writings have been circulated in newspapers doesn't mean he is notable. This is the point you're failing to understand. There are tons of Nigerian writers whose writings are recycled among Nigerian newspapers. Does this mean that they are all notable? I have said this and continue to say this. The subject of this article is not notable. He has not been discussed in significant detail.  V e r s a c e 1 6 0 8 (Talk) 01:03, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I actually forgot all about Redotec's mentioning of France 24 and Ebony (magazine) having Ayo Sogunro as an expert. As for having his open letter published in several top 20 media sites does really mean something. Many journalists distribute what they have written to different outlets. It is the outlets that choose on the basis of it being something newsworthy, and having a personal letter published so widely, means that several top 20 news outlets think that Ayo Sogunro's personal views on this matter are apparently notable. This one letter has also generated a huge amount of talk in Nigeria apparently, judging from the online buzz and mentions in less notable media outlets than the top 20 here. As for the top 20 I have above, the majority of the links are to media that talk about him, not articles that were written by him. I really find your opposition in the face of the overwhelming evidence that this man is notable per WP:Notability (people) a bit strange. I will quote from WP:Notability (people) once more: "If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability". You must have your reasons to find him non-notable, and I have discovered that he is quite notable. There's much more to be found on him but as I wrote above, I have limited myself to the top 20 as mentioned in that list. - Takeaway (talk) 01:19, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * You still don't get it, do you? This subject is just not notable! The statement you quoted says "if the DEPTH of coverage in any given source is not SUBSTANTIAL......", this means that the multiple sources that would establish notability may not have SUBSTANTIAL DEPTH, but must still have some kinda DEPTH on the subject and not mentions...that's the reason the concluding part of the sentence (which you've always left out) says: "....;trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability". This means; even if there are multiple sources, trivial coverage still may not establish notability. I won't reply to you anymore. I will just wait for admin to close the discussion (or for other users to contribute).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 12:39, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
 * This controversial writer and social commentator really gets a huge amount of attention in, and outside of, official media for someone who is, as two people here repeatedly keep stating, non-notable... - Takeaway (talk) 13:18, 17 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep Numerous mentions of the subject in leading Nigerian newspapers — like the ones Takeaway has provided — and on some international news websites plus 2 - 3 quality reviews of his works indicates that the subject is notable and are enough to earn him a stand alone article. However all unsourced information in the BLP may be marked with the citations template or removed if they appear contentious. And if all unsourced contentious contents are removed, the article may likely be brought down to stub class. Either that, or a maintenance template be placed indicating that the article lacks or needs additional reliable sources for verification. Stanleytux (talk) 19:35, 17 October 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.