Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johan Akan


 * 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 delete. Despite the unusual course of the arguments, there can be no other conclusion than "delete". 78.26 (spin me / revolutions) 18:17, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Johan Akan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Promotional article created by a PR firm. Does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for biographies. Rare sources. Some too closely associated with the subject, preventing the article from being neutral and verifiable. Orphan article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiMeWiki (talk • contribs) 01:22, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete The article was tag-bombed by the author of this AfD. A lot of sources are useless, and don't support the information they're claiming to support. It being authored by a PR firm isn't the main problem here, it's the notability and sourcing. So, I'll go for a delete.   Vermont  &#124; reply here  01:37, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Unsuitable for Wikipedia. 209.152.44.201 (talk) 01:52, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * You have to say why it is "unsuitable". Just saying delete/unsuitable is of no effect.104.163.148.25 (talk) 09:02, 14 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Regardless of the author of the article and its weak content, the subject (ie Johan Akan) does not meet Wikipedia's eligibility criteria. The subject is not famous, nor well-known, nor even known to the greatest number. Not everyone is eligible to have their own Wikipedia page. Being a model is in no way sufficient by itself. The content of this biography resembles a LinkedIn or IMDb page - beyond severely lacking multiple serious and reliable sources. Johan Akan has a limited career and like thousands of models he walks runways, poses, appears in a few ads here and there (his curriculum is very limited, even without adequate sources). All models do serve as faces for brands, highly common because it's the basics of their job. Wikipedia is not however, LinkedIn, IMDb, a casting website, nor a directory of models. WikiMeWiki (talk) 10:21, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * PLEASE NOTE that the above comment is the AfD nominator,WikiMeWiki  Vermont &#124; reply here  11:24, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Wiki Me  Wiki 17:32, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 06:13, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 06:13, 13 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.