Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sheye Banks

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. If anyone would like this article reproduced in their draft space, drop me a line. A Train^talk 09:15, 8 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sheye Banks[edit]

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

Lacks WP:INDEPTH coverage for a biographical article. Fails WP:GNG. Darreg (talk) 18:25, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

an upcoming OAP that has never worked for a major radio station and fails WP:ANYBIO and WP:SIGCOV. Has worked only at Kiss FM (differs from overseas station of same name) and Unilag FM, the former is a very new station, while the latter is a university station that lacks mainstream following. Additionally, 100% of all the articles created by the author of this article is under the same non-notable management team (TSC management), which is suspicious per WP:COI. Subject has never won a notable or semi-notable award, Nigeria Broadcasters Merit Awards is the only semi-notable award in the article by my interpretation of WP standard, winning it may count for something, but being nominated once for it counts for absolutely nothing.

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:32, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 19:32, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move to draft Almost as if the one who proposed this article be deleted didn't as per WP:BEFORE do a good research before taking this action, he has once been cautioned about this (when he nominated a standard article of mine for deletion, This article was eventually "saved" From my own research, his Name (Sheye Banks) is mentioned & even attached with peacock titles but the problem is the reliability of those sources mentioning his name. I think he possesses some influence over articles written about him.

but yes! definitely there seems to be some degree of coverage of our subject of discussion by the local media & I believe rather than delete It , it should be moved to draft. Remember that Wikipedia is always in progress. A move to draft is best, as it gives the page editor more time to develop the article to Wikipedia standard. Celestina007 (talk) 22:40, 19September 2017 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Optakeover^(U)(T)(C) 17:24, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I do not see the subject getting notable in the nearest future, so no point moving to draft. I noticed same editor who created Chris Rio, made this one too. Promotional purpose only. —Oluwa2Chainz »» (talk to me) 22:14, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: One more relist, as a BLP
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Black Kite (talk) 09:07, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Draft. I think that if the promotional language was removed and some better sources found this article could be sustained, and that there is enough of a claim to notability here that this should be given a chance for improvement. It can always be deleted later. 331dot (talk) 10:30, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

He will never be notable till Jesus comes, except something as unlikely as Trump winning an election happens in his career. Darreg (talk) 11:26, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

President Trump might not agree with you. I appreciate your reply but my view remains unchanged. 331dot (talk) 11:30, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:42, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment my !vote earlier was a move to draft, but from closer look and observation I say the page be deleted and recreated at a later time when subject of the article may have gathered more coverage. Please let us learn to avoid being WP:UNCIVIL as per our choice of words towards other editors and the subject of their articles. let us work with decorum. Furthermore let certain editors study closely WP:NOTHERE and WP:PEACOCK hence they risk damaging a potentially good article. Celestina007 (talk) 12:15 40, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

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.