Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clifford Braimah


 * 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 speedy keep. Withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Szzuk (talk) 07:26, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Clifford Braimah

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

During discussions at this article's DYK nomination, as well as WT:DYK, some concerns were raised if Braimah was notable per our guidelines. A search reveals some coverage about him, mostly routine coverage such as news of his appointment, and statements by him. There also appears to be some coverage about an alleged plot to unseat him as head of Ghana Water. He also appears to have won an award, but it is unsure if the said award is notable in Ghana (the magazine that gave it, Humanity Magazine International, does not have an article). In the interest of the DYK nomination moving forward, as it has stalled, this AfD is to test for consensus on whether or not Braimah meets our notability guidelines, or if the coverage on him is significant enough. This nomination is procedural and I am neutral on his notability. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:00, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:01, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:01, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ghana-related deletion discussions. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:01, 28 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment Is Ghana Water a government-appointed national position? If so, he likely passes WP:NPOL. (Don't have time to do more of a search at the moment.) SportingFlyer  talk  23:15, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * The article states that he was appointed by a Minister, so he was technically government appointed. WP:NPOL and WP:POLOUTCOMES are vague on the matter of if a position parallel to him is inherently notable: WP:POLOUTCOMES (an essay, but still) argues that only cabinet-level appointed officials are generally considered inherently notable, but the page also has this relevant quote: "Sub-cabinet officials (assistant secretary, commissioner, etc.) are usually considered notable, especially if they have had otherwise notable careers." So the main topic for discussion here is if the coverage on him is enough to establish notability (and I personally am slightly leaning towards a weak yes, though of course that's for this discussion to decide). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:20, 28 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment I don't know why you pinged me, except that I inserted the above search template into the DYK nomination template after your comments. This could have been done on that template, and this AFD is over-kill.  I don't live in that part of the world, and I don't have the knowledge to determine this.  In the United States, where I live, appointed positions on any level of government are notable.  Anything else is a civil service job where you have to fill out an application. Truly, I don't know why you opened this and just didn't keep it in one place at DYK.  — Maile  (talk) 23:39, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I started an AfD at the suggestion of, and a previous discussion of the subject on WT:DYK also suggested an AFD. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:42, 28 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:FORUMSHOP. You already had a response on the DYK template that this person is notable. Your response to that was to open this AFD. — Maile  (talk) 01:31, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Maile, if your intent at the DYK template was to say that the person was notable, it was not at all clear to me. I saw it as showing a tool for investigating a person's notability (or topic's), not as a statement that the tool would show that they were. DYK is a far from ideal place to determine notability, while AfD is the definitive one. Can you please tell me which response at the template said the person was notable, because I just don't see it, and since I'm the one who urged Narutolovehinata5 to bring this here so there could be a determination of notability, that would mean that I'm the forum shopper, and such was in no way my intent. (The DYK nominator seems to have washed their hands as regards to notability.) BlueMoonset (talk) 02:14, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * It appears I wasn't seeing the updated version of the nomination page at the main DYK nominations page for some reason when I posted the above, so I didn't realize Mary Mark Ockerbloom had posted a comment about notability; the latest thing I saw was Crosstemplejay's month-and-a-half-old comment. My apologies. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:53, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * KEEP. Repeating my quoted material from the DYK: "Regarding notability: There are news articles from at least a dozen different sources quoted on the page, and in at least eight of those Clifford Braimah is specifically mentioned in the headline, either by name or as the Managing Director of the GWCL, or as the GWCL Boss.  I think he'd pass a notability argument." Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 22:27, 28 July 2018 (UTC) To expand on my reasoning, that he's mentioned in the headline suggests to me that he is a major figure in the story; 12 sources could pass tests for multiple, secondary, and independent. I don't consider myself knowledgeable enough about Ghana to know which ones are reliable, but I think he's close to meeting the basic criteria.  FURTHER, as noted above by SportingFlyer, I think he would pass via WP:NPOL as a politician holding national office -- he's a political appointee to the head of the national water supplier. South Africa is dealing with significant issues around water, cf. UNDESA: it's an important position. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 03:28, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Request for close - It appears this AFD was opened as a result of miscues in good faith communications. Can an uninvolved editor please close this out?  The conversation should resume on the DYK template where it started. — Maile  (talk) 10:59, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment I closed this as nomination withdrawn, per a comment on my talk page this is not the case. Szzuk (talk) 16:08, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
 * To clarify, this was not a proxy nomination on my behalf, and I had not "withdrawn" the nomination in my comment above, just apologized for not having been aware of the changed state at DYK. I have no opinion on the AfD's continuation here. BlueMoonset (talk) 16:59, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


 * Considering the discussion here and on the nomination page, I think it would be for the best to simply withdraw this AfD and let the DYK nomination run its course. The DYK nomination has been unfairly stalled for quite a while now and it's time for it to move forward., please do the honors. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:25, 30 July 2018 (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.