Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tisan Jeremiah Bako


 * 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 no consensus.  So Why  07:26, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Tisan Jeremiah Bako

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

subject fails WP:GNG, awards won are not enough to establish notability —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 17:43, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Media-related deletion discussions. —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 17:44, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 17:44, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

Recommendation for more citations would have been appropriate as he is notable and awards won are highly notable also (Ukrakpor (talk) 20:40, 11 June 2017 (UTC))
 * Strong Delete what said & from observation, subject lacks significant coverage in reliable/sources.Celestina007 (talk) 22:49, 11 June 2017 (UTC).
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   &#9742;   &#9998;  22:07, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Keep: notable OAP, passes SNG. He was not an award nominee, he won multiple notable awards. That is enough pass in my interpretation of guideline. Darreg (talk) 22:47, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
 * , kindly tell me how winning awards meets WP:GNG which primary states that If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list? —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 20:53, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * You're misquoting me. I said "SNG", not "GNG". Those two are two very different things on Wikipedia. SNG is a colloquial term that refers to specific notability guideline, informally, it primarily define any other way of assessing notability other than the traditional "significant coverage in multiple reliable sources". It is called "specific" because it is designed to gauge the notability of professionals in specific fields. The likes of NFOOTY, NAUTHOR, NCORP, NENT, NFILMS falls within this category. I'm surprised that I'm the first person to use SNG to you on Wikipedia though. With SNG, A subject doesn't necessarily need to be discussed significantly in reliable sources for it to be included on Wikipedia.


 * At the point of nomination and after I Googled the OAP, I knew the article will likely get deleted, but I was motivated to vote keep, because I want it to be on record that I remained consistent in my interpretation of policy. Darreg (talk) 08:40, 15 June 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. The subject of this article has not been discussed in significant coverage. A Google search of him doesn't show him being discussed in reliable sources. This Vanguard source is a primary source and isn't independent of the subject. Awards and nominations are not enough to establish a subject's notability. There's not a single secondary source (online or in the article) that discusses the subject in detail.  Versace1608   Wanna Talk? 00:16, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep i think you ahould google Tisan Bako instead,Tisan Jeremiah bako is his real name and Tisan Bako is his Oap Name, notable OAP, passes SNG, google Tisan Bako again.. (Ukrakpor (talk) 07:51, 16 June 2017 (UTC))
 * You should read what WP:GNG documents about notability. —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 10:13, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 09:02, 18 June 2017 (UTC) Comment: A Strong Delete !vote remains my stance on this and any editor who may think otherwise truly hasn't fully grasped the intricacy nor the true complexity of the nature of the  WP:GNG guideline, even though it may seem easy to comprehend. The subject of our discussion lacks, as per WP:INDEPTH coverage in reliable press and merely even gets mentioned in both reliable & un-reliable sources, how does he even own a stand-alone article on the encylopedia? How was this page made maifest in the first instance? please for the sake of third party readers this article should be deleted in no time.Celestina007 (talk) 22:49, 11 June 2017 (UTC).
 * Weak keep - Lack of coverage but he has won some awards. Should be good enough per WP:ANYBIO. - The   Magnificentist  15:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * , Additional criteria of GNG states that meeting one or more criteria such as ANYBIO does not guarantee that a subject should be included. —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 16:53, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep perhaps weakly. The awards, and nominations (having '', suffice for the article subject to pass WP:ANYBIO.  &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  18:22, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  So Why  06:50, 27 June 2017 (UTC) Strong Keep' I don't think it's totally nice to relist an article more than once,kindly allow admin to take decisions on this ,The awards, and nominations (having '', suffice for the article subject to pass WP:ANYBIO. (Ukrakpor (talk) 13:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)).
 * User:SoWhy is an admin and he is completely spot-on by relisting the discussion to generate clearer consensus, at least from my perspective. You can take this time to contribute to other Nigerian topics on Wikipedia pending when an admin closes the debate, hopefully, it will be inline with your argument. Welcome to Wikipedia, and congrats on your first article! Darreg (talk) 21:24, 27 June 2017 (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.