Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ejes Gist News

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 soft delete‎. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Star Mississippi 02:07, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ejes Gist News[edit]

[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)

No evidence of any notability, the two sources have identical text, which is logical as they are a press release, not an actual article by a journalist. The site has not been the subject of much attention in general (only 10 Ghits?, some more as Ejesgist apparently). Fram (talk) 15:03, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A third source has been added[1], coincidentally posted today, about an endorsement of the news site by the "Humanitarian Movement for Development". Impressive, too bad that the organisation has apparently never been mentioned before they made this statement[2] and organised the "lecture" the other two sources are talking about. All of which is rather fishy. Fram (talk) 15:36, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media, Websites, and Nigeria. Shellwood (talk) 15:48, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The creator also shares a name with the site's founder (but claims to only be a relative of them), and their user page has been deleted twice for misuse of Wikipedia as a web host (autobiography). Possibly some sanctions are warranted. JoelleJay (talk) 06:02, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
1. The said pages were delete because they were not properly arranged or put together on Wikipedia.

2. Being a relative is not against Wikipedia policy... I don't think so...

3. The issues at hand is that the Name is Worth to be on Wikipedia a. It has been registered with CAC b. Names who are not registered with CAC are already here as cited by another users. Omajemite (talk) 06:32, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Info - Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing.

Logs: 2023-09 ✍️ create

--Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 4 October 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.