Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edith Nakalema

Add links
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 keep. Spartaz Humbug! 18:13, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Edith Nakalema[edit]

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

Not seeing anything to make this person notable. Fails WP:SOLDIER and the rest reads like a normal career army officer Gbawden (talk) 09:10, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • delete A major without notable accomplishments. Mangoe (talk) 12:52, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Passes GNG. -- ATZNA 15:02, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Try finding sources, I have just scrolled quick and there should be some sources providing the persons notability - Example, look at this article from AllAfrica or this from another source. -- ATZNA 15:02, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:09, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:09, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 18:09, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 09:45, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: She has been commented on in several secondary sources which is usual for a women from the Ugandan military.--Ipigott (talk) 10:25, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Delete. No notability whatsoever. Just someone doing her job. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:11, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    @Necrothesp: - your bolded !vote here doesn't quite match the rationale.Icewhiz (talk) 13:49, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Whoops! -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:12, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    Keep. Reconsidering. Despite her relatively lowly rank, she does seem to have been a significant and influential figure in the Ugandan government. Not really emphasised in the article itself (which just presents her as a mid-ranking officer without much notability), but I admit that the media coverage does suggest a different story. In all fairness, I suspect a figure in Britain or America with this profile would be kept. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:23, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    The claim to notability, such as it is, is due to her being the Personal Assistant to the President between Nov 2016[1] and June 2017[2] - and that should probably be made clearer in the article as well.Icewhiz (talk) 15:34, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. A major doesn't pass SOLDIER. President’s Private Secretary doesn't pass NPOL. And she doesn't have anything close to SIGCOV - some coverage mentioning her in her previous political role, some coverage of her being sent to the course in the UK - but not at a level approaching SIGCOV.Icewhiz (talk) 13:51, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. @Necrothesp and @Icewhiz - Please consider GNG. ATZNA 15:15, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    I have - saying it failed WP:SIGCOV (another way of saying GNG). In straight up google the name has less than 160 hits (and many aren't about this subject, or aren't RSes in any way shape or form, etc.). In google-news (usually a good metric for the notability of contemporary political/military figures) - we have only 8 hits (and many of them are far from in depth). This is in-depth (on losing her personal secretary position and being sent to training in the UK), this one is mostly low-quality coverage of an event she was help run in the UK on Ugandan culture, this is about the marriage of her brother, in this she gets instructions to do something (mentioned in 2 paragraphs), this one also has brief mentions, this is beyond a paywall but doesn't seem to be about her, brief mentions here, and here we have a one-liner on her appointment as Personal Assistant to the President in Nov 2016 (so basically - she held this job with some power (before being removed to the UK) - for about a year)). I personally apply a bias to African subjects - requiring less coverage than say Westerners - as there are fewer news outlets spitting out news in English out to the web - however this level of coverage (one in-depth piece) - would not pass SIGCOV (or GNG). Icewhiz (talk) 15:30, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I'm basing this on the fact that her career moves are evidently followed closely in the Ugandan press.
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:24, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: Nakalema is covered adequately (a) here, (b) here and (c) here. Fsmatovu 23:34, 18 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep - She wasn't the president's private secretary. She was the head of the Private Office and Household of the President, an position which carries the title of secretary. To me, the position seems on the order of a Deputy Chief of Staff for the US president. In anycase, the article passes V, NPOV, and NOR, and the subject seems encyclopedic. Smmurphy(Talk) 14:47, 19 April 2018 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Edith_Nakalema&oldid=838065210"