Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ohimai Godwin Amaize (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.  Sandstein  20:07, 9 October 2015 (UTC)

Ohimai Godwin Amaize
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject of the article fails WP:POLITICIAN. Only serves as aid to elected politicians. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 21:44, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:16, 1 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Promotional article on a young ministerial aide. No real notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * However, note that this article has been nominated for deletion twice by the same editor apparently within eight minutes. Why? -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:10, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm also curious about 's nomination but it may have been a system event and as we have commented here, I'll close the other one. SwisterTwister   talk  05:19, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks for closing that debate, it was a systemic error and of course, you know I can never knowingly open two deletion discussions on the same topics at a time. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 05:56, 6 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete for now as there has been no further improvement since starting and my searches found some links at News and browser but this can be restarted later. SwisterTwister   talk  05:19, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete most of the news coverage of him is in passing, the subtantial articles are about his wedding, and the interviews here and here. Wikipedia seems to have an ambivalent attitude toward interviews, on the one hand their publication in reliable sources seems to be an indicator of notability, and they frequently contain substantive information about the biographee. However, since most, if not all, depending upon the interview, of the information is being sourced from the biographee they are often classed with WP:SELFSOURCE. See the essay at WP:Interviews. In this instance it appears that they only add a veneer of notability.  This might be a close case. The biographee is an inverterate poster on Twitter and other forums, and thus is quoted more than others. --Bejnar (talk) 04:47, 8 October 2015 (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.