Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kim Oprah


 * 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. I find Rupples's contribution the most persuasive per our poilicies & guidelines, and was not challenged or disproven in any way. Daniel (talk) 23:10, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Kim Oprah

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

Article about a non-notable subject who fails WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO and WP:ENTERTAINER. Only known for being a housemate in the Big Brother Season 4. They also appeared in a variety of non-notable beauty shows. — Nnadigoodluck  █ █ █ 23:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Nigeria. — Nnadigoodluck  █ █ █  23:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. — Nnadigoodluck  █ █ █  23:37, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep: Because a topic is not of interest to you doesn't make it non-notable or irrelevant.


 * And also, Wikipedia is built on citations from reliable and independent third party references. This page has no shortage of citations.


 * Also the subject is notable for more than one thing.
 * * A TV host at
 * * A reality TV star
 * * A beauty queen


 * 1. Calling paegents non-notable pageants, when the so called pageants are blue linked on Wikipedia is an insult ti the entirety of Wikipedia and what we stand for. Miss Tourism International and Miss University Africa aren't irrelevant, if not they won't have Wikipedia articles. Except the accuser is implying that Wikipedia is getting sloppy and letting mediocre pages fly in their numbers


 * 2. The subject is also a TV host who anchored two shows on Spice TV. If Spice TV was not notable, it won't be blue linked. Except the accuser is implying that Wikipedia articles aren't doing their jobs well


 * All these were achieved before Big brother.


 * 3. Then there is Big Brother Naija


 * 4. After that, the subject has gone on to become one of the faces of international brands Remy Martin, Smirnoff and Lipton in Nigeria.


 * 5. What else do you want from a Nigerian? Are you looking for BBC, CNN, Fox News and Oscar winning laurels for a Nigerian model? This is as good as a Nigerian page can be, if tgis is deleted, then 90% of all pages from Africa should go. Then after that, let's talk about Wikipedia and its inclusivity policy. Amaekuma (talk) 10:38, 22 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete: Little to no coverage outside of appearing on reality TV shows. Fails to meet WP:GNG. Hey man im josh (talk) 20:36, 21 December 2022 (UTC)


 * By little to no coverage, you mean she isnt covered by Aljazeera, BBC and CNN right? Because I dont understand how you could see glaring citations from credible Nigerian media houses. Media houses that have been used through out all other Nigerian pages and say there aren't enough.


 * These are citations from when she represented Nigeria as a beauty queen, even before big brother.


 * She was also a TV host on Spice TV. Is being a TV house not notable enough?.


 * Wikipedia articles are deleted as a result of poor citation and sourcing. This article has adequate citations from reliable sources. An opinion formed on whether an article is notable based on itnit being your kind of article or you not having an interest in the subject isn't the Wikipedia way. 


 * Notability is all about googling a person's name and drawing conclusions from the first two links you see. Amaekuma (talk) 23:04, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

References


 * Delete. Basically the subject is a beauty pageant and Big Brother contestant, a presenter for a specialist TV channel, a product promoter and an entrepreneur putting her name on a brand of beauty products. Out of these, the one that most likely helps with establishing notability is her role as a TV presenter. My searches showed a video snippet of her "interviewing" or rather seeking comments to quick fire questions at a fashion show. The exact nature of her TV role or how long she was engaged in the role is not specified. The relevant source is a mere mention, see.


 * WP:NBIO states that "Notable" in the sense of being famous or popular—although not irrelevant—is secondary. The use of Google is an invalid criterion in establishing notability as per WP:INVALIDBIO. Kim's work comes under Entertainers; her promotional work being a facet of modelling. Wikipedia is a lagging indicator of notability and Kim may come to deserve a standalone article, but on what she's reported to have done so far she fails both criteria set out under WP:NMODEL. The article's sources do not establish notability. There is detail in the interview with Kim in source but this is a Primary source, i.e. Kim speaking about/promoting herself, as is, see Interviews and WP:NBASIC. Many of the other sources mention Kim as a former Big Brother contestant and in essence are either promotional or impart trivia/gossip.


 * A valid merge or redirect target doesn't spring to mind.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:15, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * (As an aside, the article's infobox and external website links should be pointed to Kim's Instagram page, not the website promoting her branded beauty products as this violates WP:NOTADVERT). Rupples (talk) 20:21, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete There is are lots of short mentions, but none that can be considered to be in depth, independent and reliable. BruceThomson (talk) 08:38, 1 January 2023 (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.