Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Adozi


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 07:12, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Simon Adozi

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

Fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO. There's not a source that is independent of the subject. Some are WP:ROUTINE coverages which announce him bagging an award, they all appear in exactly copy, verbatim. Others are his opinions, etc. No source can be used to establish GNG here. Some are "Why is did this" and "Why I did that"-ish, while others are "How we're doing this" and "How we're doing that"-ish, which falls under WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 14:57, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Nigeria. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 15:09, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: "40 under 40 awards" are not notable, nor do the others appear to be notable. Typical PROMO articles that we see from Nigeria that pop up here. Oaktree b (talk) 23:12, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep -
 * - Vanguared: Generally unreliable per WP:NGRS
 * - nairametrics is mostly quotations, considered unreliable
 * - Youtube is an interview, considered unreliable
 * - businessday - mostly quotations, considered unreliable
 * - tmynewspaper - mostly quotations, considered unreliable
 * - punchng is about his company, with some mentions of him. Not enough to count towards notability.
 * - Independent - There is enough here to count towards notability. Some quotations. Publication is generally reliable per WP:NGRS.
 * - Guardian - like the above, good one. generally reliable per WP:NGRS.
 * - leadership - based on an interview, not reliable.
 * - Guardian - based on an interview, not reliable.
 * - thenationonlineng - based on an interview, not reliable.
 * - The Sun - This is a good article and publication reliable per WP:NGRS.

Summary: I found 3 articles to be acceptable, which in my opinion is barely enough for a keep, so a weak keep is my vote.Hkkingg (talk) 08:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC)


 * You clearly do not know what WP:GNG talks about, kindly read that. I don’t want to waste my time on a source assessment. There’s, as a matter of fact, no source that satisfies GNG. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 09:03, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * 3 of the sources are from reliable publications per WP:NGRS and have significant coverage. How exactly are these not within WP:GNG? I realize that many of these decisions are subjective, while one person may decide something is a valid source another may not think so. You don't need to argue every person that opposes your nomination. Let the admins be the judge. Hkkingg (talk) 19:21, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
 * @Hkkingg It is imperative that I let you know that if there's anyone to analyse and assess WP:NGRS here, it should be me or any other Nigerian who knows very well about how Nigerian media works, don't be deceived. And again, this is a deletion discussion, and we are bound to argue things out. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:22, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Keep it civil, folks. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla  Ohhhhhh, no! 19:17, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: per nomination above.  ᗩvírαm7  •  [@píng mє]   05:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I'm still not swayed to change my !vote after the source analysis above. Oaktree b (talk) 19:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Delete: Speedy even. Promotional PR written sources that is clearly with full chest, WP:MILL. Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 23:44, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete per Oaktree. Mccapra (talk) 12:20, 2 June 2024 (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.