Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samuel Koranteng-Pipim

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. -- Cirt (talk) 10:07, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Koranteng-Pipim[edit]

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

Delete - (nominator) A minor figure in a small religion. Most of the information on the website is from primary sources or unsourced. If this figure were determined to have been noteworthy, then this article requires a fundamental rewrite which imo would be better accomplished by writing it from scratch than editing this current version that runs afoul of multiple policies like WP:NPV, WP:WEASEL. Clearly, this person fails notability for individuals._WikiMan^One 06:39, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A small religion? Salegi, the Seventh Day Adventists have roughly 66,000 churches. If that's a small religion, then I would like to know what's a medium sized religion. Cullen328 (talk) 06:58, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:02, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The article stretches to establish the appearance of legitimate sources (there are 32 references), but when you check them, they're all either dead links, testimony, WP:OR, material from pamphlets, brochures and other ephemera, or hits to the subject's own website. In short, there's not a single WP:RS that demonstrates notability. Much of the article itself seems to be WP:OR, suggesting this may be nothing more than a vanity or fan page. Respectfully, Agricola44 (talk) 03:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. Much published, cites few. Xxanthippe (talk) 07:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC).[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:AUTHOR, WP:BK, and WP:BIO. Qworty (talk) 20:29, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: when deleting, Koranteng-Pipim and Samuel Pipim should probably be deleted too as they redirect to the article which appears likely to be deleted. _{nonsense!this}_WikiMan^One 22:59, 29 January 2011 (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.