Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ahmed Yusuf (2nd nomination)

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:11, 13 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ahmed Yusuf (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Does not appear notable, although this is a vary tough case to decide. Draftifying can be considered if this article can be improved. I need more opinions on this. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 02:13, 6 December 2020 (UTC) PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A DIFFERENT AHMED YUSUF THAN THE 1ST NOMINATION!!![reply]

• Comment Prior to this being opened by another editor, I left a message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Nigeria#Ahmed Yusuf (Gamaliya) (permalink) asking for input. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 02:22, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete and salt As noted, this is not the same subject as the original AfD; this subject what as far as I can tell is a state-level government bureaucrat, and as such, doesn't meet WP:NPOL, nor do the sources support WP:GNG, as they are passing mentions. I'd speedied this before as there were no credible claims of any notability. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 02:29, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohnoitsjamie: I agree. I'm not quite sure about salting, though, as I would like to see where this was recreated to the point of salting. Lastly, there is also an SPI going on related to the creator(s) of this article at at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AhmedYusuf123. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 04:47, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:41, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:41, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Unelected statewide apointees are not automatically deemed notable. I find the statement "federal commisioner of Nigeria" misleading, as he is not part of the federal ministers which are presumed notable. HandsomeBoy (talk) 14:25, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete and salt: Autobiography; promotional only; fails WP:NPOL, and keeps being recreated. Of note, this redirect, which was originally another version of the same article (I believe an attempt to get around the original speedy deletion of this article), should also be removed assuming this AfD determines deletion as the outcome. Jmertel23 (talk) 17:44, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  @Jmertel23: There were some history splits and merges which may not be easy to see by looking at just the page history of Ahmed Yusuf (Gamaliya) · ( talk | logs | links | watch ) · [revisions]. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:19, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete and salt — Autobiographical article of a non notable office holder who doesn’t satisfy WP:NPOL or any known notability criteria for inclusion. @Ohnoitsjamie, If article creator could be indef blocked for SPA self-promo that would be a great idea as well. Prior now the article had been deleted 6 times. @4thfile4thrank, did you take a look at the talk page of the article creator? Celestina007 (talk) 18:40, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohnoitsjamie: Can you please close this as delete? Consensus is rather clear. 18:46, 6 December 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4thfile4thrank (talk • contribs) 18:46, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @4thfile4thrank: Procedurally, there is an advantage to having this close "normally" as "deleted as a result of a deletion discussion" rather than using a speedy-deletion criteria. Personally, I don't think it would do much harm to give the page author a few more days to surprise me and probably the rest of us by finding sources that would demonstrate that this person does in fact meet WP:N. I don't know if search engines are indexing the article or not, but if they are, they are also indexing the "deletion" and "notability" templates, so it's not "helping" this person's "publicity engine" if it gets indexed. (it's marked "noindex") davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 18:56, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Comment Agree that it's looking pretty snowy but I'm also not opposed to giving it another day or so. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:57, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom. Em-mustapha 04:25, 11 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• @Ohnoitsjamie: Is it now appropriate to close thid? Many days have passed and it is snowing badly. 4thfile4thrank (talk) 00:08, 12 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - does not meet WP:GNG, and as pointed out by HandsomeBoy, "unelected statewide apointees are not automatically deemed notable".Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:40, 13 December 2020 (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.