Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Erhabor

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:00, 17 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greg Erhabor

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

I am drive-by nominating this article for deletion seeing as it was previously speedy deleted (see User:Greg Efosa Erhabor), obvious COI, and was also prodded for deletion and had the tag removed with no content change by the prod-remover. The citations are also heavily implied COI with the page creator (seeing as hes the personal secretary, he probably wrote the cited articles). The citations are also quite dubious at best. Jcmcc (Talk) 10:15, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I spent some time trying to make it a little more NPOV. Per the nom, it is clearly a COI problem with with what are effectively primary sources. I don't see sufficient reliable secondary sources to support keeping it. There are some sources and there is perhaps a case that he is notable, at least in Nigeria, but the current article isn't a great starting point. The original version is pretty much a copyvio too (see the duplicate detector). QuiteUnusual (talk) 10:46, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No RS, so fails wp:V. Agree with above reasoning. BakerStMD 17:34, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
WEak keep -- I find his status as a church pastor and leader of a ministry - presumably part-time - unconvincing as to making him notable. On the other hand, the academic positions that he holds might just qualify him to remain, but that ius an area on which I would not normally comment. Peterkingiron (talk) 14:13, 13 April 2015 (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.