Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Asiricomedy (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Liz Read! Talk! 02:32, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Asiricomedy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

If someone requests for the source analysis I would do it. RATIONALE: The article is filled with interviews from different reliable sources making them non-independent and thus failing the general notability guidelines. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 02:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:40, 7 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 02:10, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment - I think this one is quite hard. I agree with the nom that the sources on the page are generally weak and many/most appear to be interviews in the Nigerian press. On the other hand, I don't have full access to the Nigerian press at it seems to me at least possible that he is a well-known and noted comedian there. The guff on a deleted-and-recreated page makes me wonder about COI issues. I'm not sure how to untangle these thoughts. JMWt (talk) 16:39, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Nigerian sources are to taken with a pinch of salt. As a Nigerian I know when something is done for promo. I can bet on that. Also, I have never heard of this comedian (which is not why I nominated it), so, he is not well known or noted here. Best, Reading Beans (talk) 19:38, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 01:45, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Procedural keep. No vaild deletion rationale was brought forward. The intro is focused on the references, rather than the sources out there. It is also focused on references that are not good, and it is unclear if a serious search for good sources was conducted. Nothing is clear from this nomination. gidonb (talk) 18:05, 23 September 2023 (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.