Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wale Aladejana

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 delete. Sandstein 11:43, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wale Aladejana[edit]

Wale Aladejana (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)

Does not meet WP:GNG, WP:NBIO. Sources provided are unreliable, and even if they were reliable, they do not provide significant independent coverage of the subject, and mostly include photos of the subject at various publicity events as well as quotes. I originally submitted this for PROD, dePROD by RebeccaGreen. Here is the Google search that I did of the subject, before nominating it for PROD: [1] Not a single of those is significant coverage in a reliable source. If you search on Google proper, you get a bunch of less reliable sources and Youtube videos made by the subject. signed, Rosguill talk 06:10, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment My reason for dePRODding was: "Searching on two forms of his name (Wale Aladejana and Adewale Aladejana), I find many more sources which do provide significant independent coverage, and which need to be assessed for reliability." Since this has now come to AfD, I will add some here. RebeccaGreen (talk) 10:24, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:46, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 12:46, 8 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The sources are of poor quality, they are either puff pieces from likely unreliable sources or are about the company rather than him. My limited experience when looking at Nigerian websites is that many don't do the most basic fact-checking. My inclination is therefore for a delete, although I will wait to hear from someone with a better understanding of Nigeria websites before deciding. Hzh (talk) 11:22, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This list may be of some use. signed, Rosguill talk 18:01, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete On another search, I would agree that the coverage (under either version of his name), although significant, is not reliable and is often not independent, either. RebeccaGreen (talk) 02:47, 15 December 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.