- 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 keep. Clear consensus to keep. Editors need not, apparently, be reminded that AfD is not for cleanup, but perhaps it's useful to tell them that cleanup (article improvement) is certainly not forbidden: it's always a shame to see sourcing in an AfD that is not then brought into the article. Drmies ( talk) 16:51, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kevin Nwankwor
- Kevin Nwankwor ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG; couldn't find any article detailing the subject online. Only self published sources and social media sites. Jamie Tubers ( talk) 23:34, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Delete. The best source I could find for this person is here. The rest I ran into weren't secondary reliable sources that would come close to meeting WP:GNG. Although the source I provided is secondary and reliable, there aren't enough sources to assert that this person has significant coverage, and hence I do not believe that WP:GNG is met. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 23:45, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- Changing to Keep - per the sources provided below by Wikicology. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 11:07, 24 July 2015 (UTC)|
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 01:08, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 01:08, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 01:09, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep:- Obviously notable. Subject of the article easily meet WP:FILMMAKER#3 as the scriptwriter, director and producer of Tempting Fate. In addition, i found Thisdaylive, PM News, The Sun News, Nigerian Entertainment News, Daily Sun News, Vanguard News, News Headlines to mention few. Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 20:54, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- COMMENT: You just gave links talking about a film which he directed and not publications about the subject of this article. According to the criteria you cited, the work (which is a film in this case) can only make him notable if it has "been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". Is there any book written on Tempting Fate? Or maybe an independent documentary film on it? or expert analysis? weekly column in a newspaper?-- Jamie Tubers ( talk) 23:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- If you feel that Tempting Fate is not a significant or well-known work, then why are you still waiting? Take it to WP:AfD and let see how far your argument will go! I still found News Telegraph. Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 06:28, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep I deem the subject of the article notable as it surely passes WP:FILMMAKER#3 per multiple reliable sources highlighted by Wikic¤l¤gy. Eruditescholar ( talk) 04:27, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep per meeting
WP:BASIC through the
multiple independent reliable sources found through diligent
WP:BEFORE and offered here to us by
Wikicology. Nominator, I believe you may be misinterpreting WP:BASIC, which tells us we need
significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject
and which offer more-than-trivial information about a topic being sourced. What is often overlooked is that a topic being sourced does not have to be the sole topic spoken of in a source, and significant does not mandate "substantial" Imagine... that non-policy is a redlink... imagine that. Schmidt, Michael Q. 12:04, 29 July 2015 (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.
- 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 keep. Clear consensus to keep. Editors need not, apparently, be reminded that AfD is not for cleanup, but perhaps it's useful to tell them that cleanup (article improvement) is certainly not forbidden: it's always a shame to see sourcing in an AfD that is not then brought into the article. Drmies ( talk) 16:51, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Kevin Nwankwor
- Kevin Nwankwor ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:GNG; couldn't find any article detailing the subject online. Only self published sources and social media sites. Jamie Tubers ( talk) 23:34, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Delete. The best source I could find for this person is here. The rest I ran into weren't secondary reliable sources that would come close to meeting WP:GNG. Although the source I provided is secondary and reliable, there aren't enough sources to assert that this person has significant coverage, and hence I do not believe that WP:GNG is met. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 23:45, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- Changing to Keep - per the sources provided below by Wikicology. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 11:07, 24 July 2015 (UTC)|
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 01:08, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 01:08, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 ( T· E· C) 01:09, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep:- Obviously notable. Subject of the article easily meet WP:FILMMAKER#3 as the scriptwriter, director and producer of Tempting Fate. In addition, i found Thisdaylive, PM News, The Sun News, Nigerian Entertainment News, Daily Sun News, Vanguard News, News Headlines to mention few. Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 20:54, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- COMMENT: You just gave links talking about a film which he directed and not publications about the subject of this article. According to the criteria you cited, the work (which is a film in this case) can only make him notable if it has "been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". Is there any book written on Tempting Fate? Or maybe an independent documentary film on it? or expert analysis? weekly column in a newspaper?-- Jamie Tubers ( talk) 23:29, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
- If you feel that Tempting Fate is not a significant or well-known work, then why are you still waiting? Take it to WP:AfD and let see how far your argument will go! I still found News Telegraph. Wikic¤l¤gy t@lk to M£ 06:28, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep I deem the subject of the article notable as it surely passes WP:FILMMAKER#3 per multiple reliable sources highlighted by Wikic¤l¤gy. Eruditescholar ( talk) 04:27, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
- Keep per meeting
WP:BASIC through the
multiple independent reliable sources found through diligent
WP:BEFORE and offered here to us by
Wikicology. Nominator, I believe you may be misinterpreting WP:BASIC, which tells us we need
significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject
and which offer more-than-trivial information about a topic being sourced. What is often overlooked is that a topic being sourced does not have to be the sole topic spoken of in a source, and significant does not mandate "substantial" Imagine... that non-policy is a redlink... imagine that. Schmidt, Michael Q. 12:04, 29 July 2015 (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.