Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kofi Danso

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. Sandstein 10:04, 18 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kofi Danso[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)

Does not meet notability criteria of WP:GNG or WP:BIO. References given do not discuss him significantly, and Google search for the name does not come up with anything that does, except for a couple of newspaper articles discussing controversy surrounding him. ... discospinster _talk 00:55, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Per nominator. Subject does not meet general notability requirements and lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. Meatsgains^(talk) 00:58, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ghana-related deletion discussions. IntoThinAir (talk) 02:45, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:54, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kofi Danso is my first article creation, I am willing to improve it to save it from deletion. Please advise. Thanks guys Straightshoot101 (talk) 08:28, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest finding and adding reliable sources establishing the subject's notability. Meatsgains^(talk) 23:16, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I haven't checked for alternatives but the current refs are all problematic. The Prague Post is not what it used to be and now accepts contributions from basically anyone who can write 500 to 1000 word articles in coherent English (see [1]) so the content there is probably self-written publicity. PRWeb, as its name suggests, publishes self-written PR. Zim Citizen is a blog. www.MiracleArena.ca is a dead link but was presumably the ministry's official website and thus not independent. IdeaMensch is "a crowdsourced interview platform for entrepreneurs, makers, and doers" and in fact the interiew's questions are a simple template as explained here (I'm not sure that sentence is clear but basically there is no interviewer, only an interviewee and again, this is basically self-written promo). Pichpich (talk) 20:17, 16 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete After looking for references, I'm convinced there's not enough material from third-party reliable sources to meet the general notability guideline. In fact, the only coverage in reliable sources does not concern his ministry but a sinister paternity lawsuit that he lost after telling the mother that she would die if she kept the baby. But Wikipedia is not news and this affair did not result in lasting coverage. Pichpich (talk) 20:27, 16 April 2019 (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.