Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Nda-Isaiah


 * 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. Per creator's request, moving to Draft:Sam Nda-Isaiah.  bibliomaniac 1  5  00:16, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Sam Nda-Isaiah

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject of this article fails WP:GNG, WP:POLITICIAN and WP:ANYBIO. References 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8 and 10 all count as one source (Leadership newspaper) and are not independent of the subject. The Leadership source cannot count towards notability because the subject is the publishing director for the newspaper. The remaining sources cited in the article do not discuss the subject. The article contains lengthy quotes about statements the subject made. If you extract all the lengthy quotes and the subject's long list of mentors, all that's left is his position within the Leadership organization and his unsuccessful stint for the APC president position. These two pieces of information about the subject are not enough to warrant a separate article.  Versace1608  Wanna Talk? 14:15, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.   Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 14:15, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.   Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 14:15, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.   Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 14:15, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions.   Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 14:15, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * . First I'll like to say Thanks Mann and secondly is that (Nnamdigoodluck) has already put some maintenance tags in it. This page i don't know if you're the reviewer of the page but it has being maintain in according to what was tag to it. This page sources does not matter if it came on the same (1-6) cite are from one source that he was chief editor in it.

So Thanks for your work. Much respect (F5pillar 14:49, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete — The formula is usually “in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the article’s subject” most of the reliable sources present in the article are not independent of the subject & like the nominator already said, that really does next to nothing to substantiate notability claims made in the article. @, you understand this right?Celestina007 (talk) 10:14, 8 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note to closing administrator: the article's creator left this note on my talk page, requesting for the article to be moved to draftspace.  Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 15:12, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete and/or draftify. As noted, more than half of the sources here come from the subject's own employer rather than an independent source, which means they aren't notability makers — and of the six sources left once we discount those, we can drop another four: two blurbs, a one-off glancing namecheck of his existence in an article about somebody else and a piece of his own bylined writing about another subject. That leaves us with just two references that are both independent of him and non-trivially about him, but that's not enough to get him over WP:GNG. Bearcat (talk) 00:52, 12 April 2020 (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.