Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Olabisi Johnson


 * 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  11:06, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Olabisi Johnson

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable individual lacking in-depth, non-trivial support. "References" are single line entries, facebook supported blogs, or fail to mention the article subject. "References" fail to meet the standards in WP:RS and fail to provide significant coverage. red dogsix (talk) 06:48, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:01, 26 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:01, 26 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep I strongly object to the deletion of this page. The politician is a notable one. A simple google search will tell you this. The references provided are mostly from the most popular Nigerian newspapers and from the Nigerian law report confirming most of what was reported. Emmantox (talk) 15:56, 26 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - @reddogsix - Since "Significant coverage is certainly not a brief mention or two in a (sic) article", how many mentions and how lengthy do they have to be to be considered significant by "Wikipedia's" standards. Lyteon01 (talk) 05:03, 27 August 2018 (UTC) — Lyteon01 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment - @Lyteon01 - As a start, show me one that is more than a brief mention of the subject and in-depth about the subject - the Wikipedia article is supported by very brief mentions about the article subject. The subject's name in a list of people such as "...while members included Chief Olabisi Johnson," is not in-depth, non-trivial support.  red dogsix (talk) 12:37, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - @reddogsix - You have now moved from the issue of notability and significant coverage to Conflict of Interest. Have you considered the possibility that I am just doing a lot of research on the subject and updating the article as the info becomes available? Have you considered the possibility that the subject is notable enough for all this info to be public knowledge within the subject's community and readily available without the editors having any close association with the subject? You proposed that the article should be improved upon yet you continue to pick new issues with each new improvement. Is this also "Wikipedia's standards"? Lyteon01 (talk) 12:59, 27 August 2018 (UTC) — Lyteon01 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * @Lyteon01- No one has changed the focus of ther AfD except you. Lyteon01 created the coi by indicating the staged photo was Lyteon01's own work - this indicates a high probability of coi. I also note you did not deny the coi.


 * Instead of ignoring the real issue, as I indicated above, point out one reference more than a brief mention of the subject and in-depth about the subject - the Wikipedia article is supported by very brief mentions about the article subject. The subject's name in a list of people such as "...while members included Chief Olabisi Johnson," is not in-depth, non-trivial support. Ignoring the issue of notability will not make it go away.  red dogsix (talk) 14:15, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * @reddogsix- Like I earlier pointed out to you, the subject is a public figure in a third world country where internet access is relatively recent and still very limited. Being a public figure, anybody can take a photo of him as I did. This does not in anyway indicate a close connection. Would you have preferred a photo from a source that could generate copyright issues for you to pick on? Demanding the kind of online presence that you term "significant coverage" from persons who have only recently gained exposure to the internet doesn't speak much to fair-play. I believe by coi, you refer to this article being a paid job. It is not; and I expect that by Wikipedia standards, that should be taken without prejudice and in good faith. If all the facts that have been placed before you are not sufficient in your opinion to leave this article be, please feel free to yank it off. Obviously, you have made up your mind and no amount of improvement to the article will satisfy you. Lyteon01 (talk) 14:52, 27 August 2018 (UTC) — Lyteon01 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * @Lyteon01 - The criteria for inclusion into Wikipedia is quite clear and has been pointed out to you numerous times. Please see WP:BIO, WP:POLITICIAN, and WP:GNG.  Just being a public figure is not one of the criteria.  Unfortunately, there is no provision for newly minted figures to get a pass because their coverage is not adequate to support inclusion into Wikipedia.  I agree it may be difficult to provide online support, but there are thousands and thousands of other articles for the region you point out that have the support needed to be included in Wikipedia - they are able to follow the criteria for inclusion of articles.  It is not my intent to have the article removed; only to have it meet Wikipedia criteria.  You are right about one thing, I have made up my mind; however, not about what you have indicated.  The only thing I am sure of is, currently the article fails to meet Wikipedia criteria.  You have a chance to rectify that situation by adding the support needed to insure its long-term addition to Wikipedia. Best of luck.   red dog</b><i style="color:#000;">six</i> (talk) 17:14, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 16:32, 2 September 2018 (UTC) <div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 13:14, 9 September 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - @reddogsix obviously this article was posted on Wikipedia 2 weeks before the news item was published in The Tribune Newspaper. Tribune obviously copied the File:OLABISI JOHNSON.jpg from Wikipedia without requesting permission from the copyright owner: me. Since material published on Wikipedia are not covered by Nigerian copyright laws, by publishing the said picture on Wikipedia, I have since waived the rights to this image. I request the immediate undeletion of the said image on these grounds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lyteon01 (talk • contribs)  — Lyteon01 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment - @Lyteon01 - You have not shown you are the owner of the image. The image may have been published elsewhere before you submitted it to commons - before you write me back and say I am accusing you of this, I am only telling you what is the weakness in your argument.   There is a very simple way to establish ownership, all you need to do is follow the instructions in WP:DCM.  Once you have established yourself as the owner you can either contact an Admin or resubmit the image in commons.  My best to you.  red <b style="color:#000;">dog</b><i style="color:#000;">six</i> (talk) 20:41, 11 September 2018 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: I am reluctant to close this as no consensus, because the nomination makes a reasonable case for deletion, and there has essentially been no informed discussion about it.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –&#8239;Joe (talk) 20:42, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete The article is hard to follow to get a good sense of the notability claim, especially because our existing material doesn't seem to address the duties of the position of Chairman of the Ondo West Local Government. Based on what my understanding of the subject, it appears that the subject was the chair of a local administrative division of Ondo State (which is distinct from service as the equivalent of mayor of Ondo City) and would not meet WP:NPOL. The subject is currently running for the Nigerian Senate. While a redirect to the appropriate election page or list of party candidates would be in order, there does not appear to be a valid redirect target. If the subject wins his election, the page can be recreated. --Enos733 (talk) 04:23, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Geo-politically, there is nothing like Ondo City, Ondo West is a subclass of Ondo State, not Ondo City. Same way, there is nothing like Ibadan, Benin, etc. These major cities have the same traditional ruler, and have had constitutional government in the past but as at today, Nigeria does not practice monarchy and they've been disintegrated, although monarch are still highly respected according to the constitution. But that being said, anything lower than a ruler for a state fails WP:NPOL, so him being the head of the local government doesn't make him notable. In addition to that, most LGA chairmen in Nigeria are usually appointed by the state government, not democratically. I haven't looked at GNG and other claims in the article. My comment is just to address his position as LGA chairman and WP:NPOL. HandsomeBoy (talk) 17:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I am still unclear about how local government functions in Nigeria, but it appears we reach the same conclusion, that the chair of a local administrative division would not meet WP:NPOL. --Enos733 (talk) 21:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.