Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ijeoma Oluo


 * 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. Now a well developed article, that is snowballing into an overwhelming consensus, about a notable author with plenty of sources -- and a NYT reviewed book. Sadads (talk) 03:16, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Ijeoma Oluo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable blogger/writer who got one quip in a local news source that she was best. This is 1BLP at it's lowest. Article contains some references, but mostly to primary and unreliable sources. Throw in a few (not in citation givens) and self published references, and there is no notability shown at all. Antonioatrylia (talk) 21:53, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Keep - this article as it stands meets WP:GNG, the author has received independent coverage in multiple secondary sources over a sustained period of time, about different topics and incidents (Nytimes, Seattle Magazine, The Stranger, Salon). The article could use some work in moving citations added by the newbie who started the article into Further Reading or Bibliography. In addition to the sources that are there, I was in the midst of improving the article, will continue. Monikasj (talk) 22:04, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Every Morning (there's a halo...) 22:04, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 01:22, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 01:23, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Baby miss  fortune 01:23, 3 February 2018 (UTC)


 * FFS --Dennis Bratland (talk) 02:05, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * WP:GNG does not merely require sources in RSs but that they are independent and significant. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:41, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You don't find even one independent and significant source in any of those 22 links? You don't consider Time magazine to be independent? Are you saying Ijeoma Oluo controls Time Magazine? And CNN? Does CNN work for Ijeoma Oluo? And Wired? And Ebony? None of these are independent? Is she some kind of supervillian? What the hell? Honestly. This is wasting everyone's time. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:24, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I never made any of those claims. Just reminding people of the actual requirements as they might just be posting sources and not considering the GNG criteria. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:46, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * So if I were to reply "Don't be an asshole" right now to you, you would in no way interpret that as me implying that you had been or were being an asshole, right? I'd just be saying to "people" in general that they shouldn't be an asshole and/or be assholes. Carefully indenting my reply like this  directly under what you posted should not be interpreted as addressing the editor under whose comments I placed my totally general, nonspecific, impersonal remark, intended only as good advice for all people everywhere. Nobody ought to be an asshole, nothing personal, please don't think for one second I'm referring to you. Never in a million years would I say such a thing to a specific editor. Just saying, is all. I will keep your excellent general, nonspecific advice in mind going forward. I'm sure all "people" appreciate that you reminded them of the basic requirements of GNG. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 21:51, 3 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep persubstantial coverage in reliable independent sources. FloridaArmy (talk) 02:24, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep What Dennis said. Innisfree987 (talk) 17:15, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per sources provided by Dennis. Appears to pass GNG.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 18:58, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep clearly passes GNG. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 20:17, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep substantial evidence of notability in the article. Meets GNG. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 23:23, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow keep — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 04:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * After the first half-dozen ivotes--all keep--were posted, the nominator engaged in what I'd stress gives the impression (not the certainty) of canvassing, by contacting only two (1, 2) of the 15+ previous editors of this entry who had not yet weighed in on the AfD; neither of the two who were contacted were particularly significant contributors. This may not have been intentional, especially as I note those are, at this time, 's most recent WP edits, so perhaps something came up off WP to prevent them from contacting the page's editors more uniformly. However I still find it highly unadvisable to undertake to post these notices after numerous editors have unanimously disagreed with the nomination (as opposed to at the time of the nomination), as it can give the impression of shopping for ivotes. And obviously the bottom line that only two editors were notified is a problem regardless of intention. Given that this has happened, and that community opinion still unanimously disagrees with the nomination, I'd suggest this be snow or speedily closed, before it becomes even more of a mess than it already is (at this time, neither of the editors who received these notices have commented). Innisfree987 (talk) 18:31, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I was not canvassed or contacted in any way about this. I have edited this page in the past and I saw it was up for deletion. Oluo is definitely notable enough to have an article entry. This article is well sourced and she's mentioned in many notable places over the course of years. She is an influential writer and has published articles in several major newspapers, and has published two books, one of which has been noted by several newspapers and magazines including the NYT and Harper's Bazaar. Besides all that, Oluo was also part of a Facebook account deletion controversy in 2017 that was widely covered in the news at the time. Perhaps there are problems with the article that need to be addressed, but she certainly deserves an entry. Someone may have been misbehaving, possibly because they didn't understand the rules, but the article stands on its own and shouldn't be deleted. Lonehexagon (talk) 23:09, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Well-known writer. WP:GNG met. Hmlarson (talk) 22:17, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep . I concur with everything said by Dennis Bratland, especially the swearing.  Gamaliel  ( talk ) 00:24, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
 * keep article clearly meets WP:GNG especially after improvements. Jessamyn (talk) 01:09, 6 February 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.