Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obiwu

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. Nomination withdrawn by nominator (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 22:58, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Obiwu (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)

Subject of the article fails WP:GNG. I can't find that evidence of notability. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 21:01, 20 December 2015 (UTC) Nomination Withdrawn. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 06:39, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

• Delete per WP:GNG. --Rubbish computer (Merry Christmas!: ...And a Happy New Year!) 23:45, 20 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Article should no longer be deleted as it has been updated with new information and linked to related pages. 1buRi6hw4n (talk) 12:18, 26 December 2015 (UTC) — 1buRi6hw4n (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:10, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:10, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:11, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:11, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:11, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for now and draft and userfy if needed as my searches only found a few links here and there at Books, News and browsers. SwisterTwister talk 06:55, 27 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Article is rich in offline sources and links. Suggest areas of improvement, if necessary.Anombano (talk) 18:27, 27 December 2015 (UTC) — Anombano (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Weak keep. The article is heavily larded with Wikipedia:Wikipuffery, sources that don't mention the subject, sources by rather than about the subject, or sources that mention him only trivially. But the Akubuiro piece (repeated as references 3, 19) is an in-depth profile of the subject that appears to be reliably published, and the News Ghana piece (reference 12) is an in-depth review of a book of his poetry. That may be enough for WP:GNG if not for WP:PROF. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:40, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - clearly a notable person demonstrated by the secondary sources. I checked out a sample of the references. An article on this man would improve the encyclopedia. Best Regards,   Bfpage |leave a message  01:29, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep For a relatively minor writer and scholar, this seems to have decent sourcing. He meets criteria for notability. Dimadick (talk) 09:59, 3 January 2016 (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.