Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yemi d. ogunyemi


 * 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. Discounting the sockpuppetry. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:36, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Yemi d. ogunyemi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A shambolic article with no evidence of notability. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 16:22, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 16:24, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 16:24, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Wikic¤l¤gyt@lk to M£ 16:24, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: No news coverage of him, although there are hits on Highbeam and Google Books. GABHello! 22:31, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The literary community agrees that when a book is published, it is a form of news, both for the publishers and the authors. When a book is reviewed it is news for the publishers and the authors. This, according to the literary community, is news coverage, especially when they are being covered by social media. Ogunyemi's case belongs to all of them. Additionally, his entry is more notable, visible, newsier than many other writers in the Wikipedia. This is the bottom line regarding my comments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Travis Burges (talk • contribs) 15:51, 6 March 2016 (UTC)  — Travis Burges (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete The article completely fails WP:BLP. There are no meaningful references. Highbeam and Google Book searches bring up his books but no search brings up WP:RS. Even in wobbly places like Amazon, the only review of the 2009 The Literary/Political Philosophy of Wole Soyinka is by the author himself. The initiating editor is an SPA. FeatherPluma (talk) 20:33, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * CommentThis may not be the best-written article, but it is good, compared with other articles, short or long, retained by the Wikipedia.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakaraomooba (talk • contribs) 21:40, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Input from yet another new SPA duly noted. FeatherPluma (talk) 21:52, 12 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. Notability not achieved. Xxanthippe (talk) 21:57, 12 March 2016 (UTC).
 * This is a very good article by all accounts, as there is no violation of any sort. Its writer should be applauded for writing it. Could you allot it its rightful place? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sakaraomooba (talk • contribs) 21:30, 12 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Travis Burges is a ✅ sock puppet of Sakaraomooba. See Sockpuppet investigations/Sakaraomooba.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:13, 13 March 2016 (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.