Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raymond Kudzawu-D'Pherdd


 * 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 Draftify for the author to continue working, since there's the possibility he might be notable. No harm in giving more time to work, but consensus is clear it's not appropriate for mainspace. Star  Mississippi  01:43, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Raymond Kudzawu-D'Pherdd

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

Despite great detail and voluminous referencing it’s not clear to me that this subject is notable. He has had an interesting career but I don’t see positions or awards that would make notability clear. The refbombing does not include independent in depth coverage. Mccapra (talk) 15:00, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators, Science,  and Engineering. Mccapra (talk) 15:00, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete agree with nom. Appears as a columnist in a few newspapers that I could find online, nothing substantial. Oaktree b (talk) 16:46, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ghana-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:51, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: Not meeting notability guidelines Proton Dental (talk) 06:27, 17 July 2022 (UTC)


 * refbombing wasn't purposeful. Was advised to ref every content. New here, still learning the ropes. Guidance welcomed. Amekomedo (talk) 08:33, 17 July 2022 (UTC)
 * hi thanks for your note. To establish that a person like thus subject is notable enough to have a bio article on Wikipedia we have a policy at WP:NACADEMIC. So we’re looking for reliable independent sources that confirm the subject passes at least one of these criteria. Other references may verify individual facts in the article, but notability is key to establishing that there should be an article at all. Mccapra (talk) 08:59, 17 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment the article creator has requested draftification for further work.  I have no objection to this. Mccapra (talk) 11:23, 17 July 2022 (UTC)


 * On the fence. But considering all the subject's activities outside academia, including media coverage and practitioner impact, one could consider he is meeting criterium 7. JamesKH76 (talk) 12:41, 17 July 2022 (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.