Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kayode Adegbulugbe (2nd nomination)


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Now that all editors advocating Keep have been identified as socks, I'm closing this as SNOW. Liz Read! Talk! 21:48, 19 March 2024 (UTC)

Kayode Adegbulugbe
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Just as non-notable per WP:BIO as he was two weeks ago, but as an obvious sock/meatpuppet has removed the db-repost speedy tag, here it is again at AFD. Article creator never responded to questions about use of multiple accounts at their user talk page. Perhaps this AFD will end quickly with a db-repost, once the two accounts have been blocked for sockpuppetry. In the meantime, a WP:BEFORE search turns up only the same gushing paid puff pieces, primary sources (such as interviews), and passing mentions. Wikishovel (talk) 14:41, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Engineering,  and Nigeria. Wikishovel (talk) 14:41, 13 March 2024 (UTC)


 * First off, what evidence do you have that I have multiple accounts? Secondly, I did contest the speedy deletion before the notice was removed, and this is exactly what I said.
 * "This page should not be speedily deleted because Kayode Adegbulugbe is a reputable individual who has made great impact and contributions to Nigeria both economically and socially. He has displayed his knowledge and expertise in the development and production of Nigeria's oil and gas. He has also been a key figure in humanitarianism with his philanthropic activities, which have helped the lives of a lot of people. Kayode is credible enough to be on Wikipedia, considering the several media platforms that has covered some of his activities and background. If it is with regards to the references or content in general, they can always be adjusted, which is why every article on Wikipedia is always up for update and improvement. I am particular about ensuring that this article stays because it is deserving."


 * Your statement here is highly accusatory, and you have drawn conclusions with very poor judgment. What is your reason for wanting this article deleted? Have you carefully gone through the article and the references? I am starting to sense some kind of discrimination on your part. You have accused me wrongly and haven't given any tangible reason for wanting the article removed.
 * From what I know, every article is up for improvement and correction. You could point out what is wrong so it gets fixed, or you could even make those corrections. That's why we are all here. To make contributions. TJO28 (talk) 14:54, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sock strike, Sockpuppet investigations/Titus Odiase. Wikishovel (talk) 00:00, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Same reason it was deleted less than 3 weeks ago, to be honest. Oaktree b (talk) 15:23, 13 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete: Again, we just deleted this less than a month ago. No new sources have been published since then. Articles with no by-lines, the usual PR fluff articles, nothing we can use for sourcing. Getting an honorary diploma at a university isn't notable. SALT and be done with this. Oaktree b (talk) 15:26, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Have you reviewed the article and compared it with what was initially deleted? I added more sources and more credible information that was lacking in the previous article. Please confirm your observations before submitting them. TJO28 (talk) 15:34, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sock strike, Sockpuppet investigations/Titus Odiase. -- Wikishovel (talk) 05:06, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * None of the sources present in the article are acceptable, as explained above. My observations are presently confirmed. Oaktree b (talk) 16:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep: Just because an article was previously deleted does not entirely close the chapter of it being on Wikipedia. From what I know, as long as required changes are made and the article aligns with Wikipedia's standards, there is no need to attack it. The subject of this article is a highly recognized individual who is known for his national and communal activities. There are references from reputable sources to that effect. And I believe more will be published. TJO28 (talk) — Note to closing admin: TJO28 (talk • contribs)  is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.
 * Sock strike, Sockpuppet investigations/Titus Odiase. -- Wikishovel (talk) 23:56, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Delete for now – a good number of these sources are included at WP:NGRS, but Vanguard and The Guardian Nigeria have promotional concerns. TLA  tlak 15:53, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * any further thoughts on the sources, following User:Vanderwaalforces' source analysis below? Wikishovel (talk) 10:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * @Wikishovel I think I added the article from The Nation which counts toward GNG, and thus is why I said "Weak keep". I thought The Guardian article, among others, would sort of support a weak keep, but there seems to be consensus that there is possible paid puff wording so I'll adjust my vote to delete. Thanks. TLA  tlak 12:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete: Fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. Every single piece found currently whether listed in the article or from BEFORE, is nothing to write home about, not enough to establish notability. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 18:15, 13 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep: I wouldn't go as far as saying the article is nothing to write home about. Does it need improvement? obviously. Does it need more notable sources? Definitely. But the individual in question seems to have some sort of notability considering his philanthropy and contribution to oil and gas projects in Nigeria. A good portion of the article does align with WP:ANYBIO. Particularly his awards and honors. GiantjohnO (talk) 20:39, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sock strike, Sockpuppet investigations/TJO28. -- zzuuzz (talk) 23:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I figured, they get snippy when you call them out. Oaktree b (talk) 01:12, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per the source assessment table compiled by Vanderwaalforces. I will check back on this in a few days in case someone turns up two more GNG sources, but unless that happens this article cannot comply with the notability guideline. 2601:5CC:8300:A7F0:5423:227C:96C8:FF0C (talk) 03:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Subject does not meet the general notability criteria. UPE concerns are also present.  Reading Beans  09:14, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Either non-notable or pretending to be notable through promotion and paid editing. HarukaAmaranth  春香 12:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Per Articles for deletion/Kayode Adegbulugbe (previous deletion). Sources if not all centers on the awards he won which is more or less notable. All the Best!   Otuọcha   (talk) 00:11, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: More of WP: UPE. All the Best!  Otuọcha   (talk) 00:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per previous AfD; fails notability guidelines. Toadette  ( Let's discuss together! ) 20:47, 18 March 2024 (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.