Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Olusola Iji


 * 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. TNT. No objection to a second try Spartaz Humbug! 05:36, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Joseph Olusola Iji

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No offense to the person who wrote this, but this article is a mess. This seems extremely promotional and reads like a resume, and does not appear to be encyclopedic. However, it does seem this person is probably notable (apparently they were an ambassador, which would pass WP:NBIO). There's also several more issues with it, which you can check in the page's multiple issues template (it's quite a large one). Thereby I decided it was best it was left up to a deletion discussion. Kirbanzo (userpage - talk - contribs) 16:13, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Kirbanzo (userpage - talk - contribs) 16:13, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Kirbanzo (userpage - talk - contribs) 16:13, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Kirbanzo (userpage - talk - contribs) 16:13, 15 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Much of the "multiple issues" template is inaccurate and/or redundant. I would suggest that the nominator rewrites it to only flag genuine issues once each. Phil Bridger (talk) 09:51, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment subject seems to be notable, further improvements need to be made for it appear to encyclopedic. Agreed per Phil Bridger Ceethekreator (talk) 23:59, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Draftify This article is a mess. However that list of improvement tags is super unhelpful. Send to draft space so that an article on a notable person can be cleaned up (the nom is correct that this is CV-like) and brought back in an acceptable way to mainspace (even if it's much shorter or incomplete as compared to today). Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 01:36, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Nominator comment - pruned the improvement tags to only list those still relevant. Kirbanzo (userpage - talk - contribs) 20:39, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete or draftify. This is so poorly written that I honestly can't make heads or tails of whether he passes WP:NPOL or not, and is referenced almost entirely to bad sources rather than reliable ones. If somebody is willing to take a stab at rewriting it in comprehensible language and finding better sources to properly demonstrate his notability, then no prejudice against recreation — but this, as written, is so bad that the blow it up and start over principle pertains. Bearcat (talk) 16:32, 22 May 2019 (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.