Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bimbo Oshin


 * 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 keep. Consensus is for the article to be retained. North America1000 10:10, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Bimbo Oshin

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

What's listed as a career is a mere 1 film apparently and all the sources here are clear announcements, mentions, profiles and all similar, WP:BASIC and WP:GNG are not policy and have never single-handedly controlled our articles, WP:NOT would apply in this case because we're not IMDb and there's enough suggesting a misuse of an IMDb-esque page. In fact, WP:GNG itself says we need significant major independent news that is independent of the subject, the sources are clear interviews, republished words, etc. Longtime existing article with still nothing in independent notability and substance, there's no automatic inherited notability from anything or anyone; nothing to suggest her career is in fact significant; searches simply found mere announcements and mentions, including entertainment listings. SwisterTwister  talk  00:04, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  00:04, 10 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete The subject of this article simply hasn't been discussed in significant detail. Moreover, she fails WP:NACTOR. She has only starred in a few films, most of which are not notable. The notability of the Omo Elemosho film she starred in can be brought into question, since the film fails 4 of the 5 criterion of WP:NFO.  Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 01:14, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm very confused by this AfD because Bimbo Oshin has been one of the top Yoruba actresses for more than 20 years now. She has acted and had lead roles in dozens of movies. Of course a web search returns thousands of results, but just to focus on interviews published by mainstream Nigerian newspapers:, . If I'm missing something, tell me. Thanks and regards, Biwom (talk) 04:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * "has acted and had lead roles in dozens of movies" yet the article lists she's only had 1 work, which instantly unconvinces WP:ENTERTAINER, our applicable standards for actors. Also, to examine your sources, the first one is a clearly labeled interview and her own published words consisting the article itself, the second is simply an entertainment column, not substance. SwisterTwister   talk  04:34, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep: Obviously passes WP:GNG. The article is referenced with notable News Outlets, which are reliable sources, discussing her in significant details. Also a quick search (web, News) shows a gazillion sources discussing her all over. This AFD is pretty much pointless to me.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 13:03, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * What I found in those links were simply entertainment blogs such as "7 Things You Should Know About Her", "Meet Bimbo and her husband", "Interview with Bimbo", "Bimbo celebrating her daughter's birthday", "An interview with Bimbo", etc. None of that satisfies our standards as it's simply trivial entertainment columns, not substance; including columns anything can author and even by her own request. SwisterTwister   talk  04:34, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't see much blogs, I saw websites of the likes of The Punch, Pulse Nigeria, Information Nigeria, Global News Nigeria, NET etc. All of these are websites of top Magazines and Newspapers in Nigeria, can you kindly explain how they don't "satisfy our standards"?--Jamie Tubers (talk) 16:52, 12 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep The subject passes WP:GNG and that is quite sufficient to have an article. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 20:04, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * WP:GNG states itself, however, that we need major independent significant news, but the ones offered or existing so far are simply entertainment columns, not the substance we need in notability, and she's also not satisfying WP:ENTERTAINER given she's only had 1 film so far. SwisterTwister   talk  04:34, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep: I initially didn't want to vote in this AFD, and consequently deleted my earlier comments, mainly because I misjudged the identity of the nominator but I couldn't just hold back not commenting on the delete votes. Firstly, she has not acted in few films, she has acted in a lot of Yoruba films. I remember seeing some of her movies while growing up, immediately I saw her face after Googling her, with the name also ringing a bell, I knew she would definitely be clearly notable because she was a big deal then, so I can understand why anyone familiar with Yoruba culture will be displeased with this AFD. Yoruba films are one of the most undocumented, especially before 2000s, but am glad all that is changing now. Internet penetration is on the increase in all aspect of Nigerian culture. Even at that, there is still sufficient information on the internet that gives a clear claim for notability. If you think Omo Elemosho isn't notable for WP, then you should go nominate it, this AFD isn't really about Omo Elemosho, even if she didn't act in the film, she will still be very notable, the film isn't her claim to notability. Leaving aside GNG, and approaching other criteria in GNGACTOR, she was nominated for Yoruba Movie Awards, the main reason why someone as notable as she is doesn't have a train of awards is that the award culture is a new thing in Nigerian film industry, infact the oldest existing notable awarding body started in 2005, and there is no category for Nigerian language based films alone, so indigenous films have to compete with English films for nomination. Darreg (talk) 21:28, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per review of existing sources, she passes GNG. — Sam Sailor 22:47, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * You claim she has acted in "a lot of Yoruba films", yet the article only list one. Why don't you expand the filmography section to support your statement? You can't make a statement and not validate it. I don't know what sources you're looking at online, but my google search of her only brought up newspaper interviews, which do not establish notability per WP:GNG. This, this, and this are interview sources which are primary sources, not secondary. Sources that are not independent of the subject are considered primary sources, not secondary sources. The Global News source looks reliable, but the article is about her eviction from Dolphin Estate. GNG states that sources do not have to be available online or written in English. If there are reliable independent Yoruba articles discussing her in detail, they will need to be included in the article. Reliable sources in print media will also need to be included in the article. The subject may be notable, but the current sources online doesn't show that. For everyone saying keep, please cite the sources you believe are notable. You can either list them here or cite them in the article.  Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 23:16, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I think wikipedia is very clear about establishing notability. The criteria is Independent reliable sources. Be aware that per WP:INDEPENDENT, "Secondary does not mean independent, and primary does not mean non-independent or affiliated with the subject". A non-independent source are things like press releases, subject's blog posts, personal websites etc. An interview conducted by a reliable media house is definitely an independent source. Most of the information in biography sources are based on what the subjects disclose anyway, so? Also note that there're lots of other coverages outside interviews, there are lots of sources (can be found in the link i gave earlier) talking about her birthdays, anniversaries, her family etc. Clearly demonstrates notability.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:05, 11 February 2017 (UTC)


 * @Versace Going by your logic, because only 2% of Nollywood films are on Wikipedia, that automatically implies that only 2% of Nollywood films are notable for Wikipedia. I'm pretty sure less than 1% of strictly Yoruba language films are on Wiki but does that really mean that only less than 1% of Yoruba films are notable? I disagree! Darreg (talk) 07:43, 11 :::February 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't understand how you derived your statement. Where in my reply did I say that if "only 2% of Nollywood films are on Wikipedia, that automatically implies that only 2% of Nollywood films are notable for Wikipedia"? Please explain to me where you're getting these figures from.   Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 16:10, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry for misinterpretation of your words. But concerning my figures, I will explain how I arrived at them. It is documented in the Cinema of Nigeria article that as at 2010, there have been a total of 400,000 Nollywood films. Note that I said 2010 and the number is likely to be close to a million 7 years later. I tried to get a more recent total was wasn't successful. Today, the number of Nigerian films on WP is about 200, I got this number from the parent Category:Nigeria films. Do the maths, 200 is less than 2% of 400k, it's actually 0.05%. Secondly, today, there are only 23 film articles that Yoruba was spoken in on Wikipedia. Note that some of these 23 film articles have English as a first language. The only way my second statistic (1%) is going to be wrong is if you will tell me that the total number of Yoruba films ever produced since the beginning of time is less than 2300, this figure is highly unlikely for anyone familiar with the industry. I don't want to derail this AFD, so let's just end the discussion here or continue on my talkpage. Once again, I apologize for fixing words into my understanding of your thoughts and labeling it as yours. Darreg (talk) 22:12, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, "interview conducted by a reliable media house" is not independent because WP:GNG itself says the contents must be independent of the subject and an interview is not, especially not when it largely takes the entire article only. SwisterTwister   talk  04:34, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * I disagree with you. while there's no consensus on interviews yet, a media interview generally passes WP:Independent to me. If a reliable media house finds a subject important enough to post an interview, without her being affiliated to the media house, the subject definitely demonstrates notability. It is quite different from the subject writing about herself in the press or blog - that definitely is not Independent. However, when a reliable source writes based on information provided by her on her personal websites, it is still a primary source, but it is now very much independent of the subject. But it's really pointless debating this anyway. The result of the AFD is pretty much decided already.--Jamie Tubers (talk) 16:44, 12 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Actually, WP:RS is the one applying here; as for the AfD, see the page you suggest above, "without undue attention to the subject's own views....protect the project from people using Wikipedia for self-promotion, personal financial benefit -- Is this source independent or third-party, or is it closely affiliated with the subject?" and our policies have never stated "If a newspaper interviewed her, she must be significant for an article here" because our policies are never controlled by such interest-based matters. The Keep votes still haven't suggested how we keep this in policy-based since WP:BaSIC and WP:GNG have never been made to Policy. SwisterTwister   talk  01:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep: Adequate indicia of notability.   Montanabw (talk) 11:32, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Which ones? SwisterTwister   talk  01:03, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep aside passing GNG, the subject has been nominated in a few notable award ceremonies including the Yoruba Movie Awards and ZAFAA African Film Academy Awards. —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 01:02, 16 February 2017 (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.