Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aderonke Dairo

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. ✗plicit 00:01, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aderonke Dairo

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Possible covert upe of a non notable politician and “philanthropist” who fails to satisfy and criterion from WP:NPOL and generally lack in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources independent of them so WP:GNG isn’t satisfied also. A before search links me to user generated sources, self published sources and PR sponsored posts. Celestina007 (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 17:39, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Wow! She’s not even running for election for another two years! Does not pass WP:NPOL. Not otherwise notable. Mccapra (talk) 18:02, 4 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. People do not get Wikipedia articles just for declaring their candidacies in future elections — the notability test for politicians is holding a notable political office, not just running for one. But this demonstrates neither that she has preexisting notability for other reasons independently of a pending candidacy, nor that she has a credible claim to her candidacy being more special than everybody else's candidacies. Bearcat (talk) 02:37, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The article did not appeared Remarkable.Aloolkaparatha (talk) 14:21, 9 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.