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. Salvio ^giuliano 12:04, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Akinlolu Jekins (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

There are no evidence of WP:SIGCOV in WP:RS. R E A D I N G ^{Talk to the Beans?} 08:05, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Nigeria and United Kingdom. R E A D I N G ^{Talk to the Beans?} 08:05, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:34, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Admittedly, he comes close to notability with two feature articles about his business endeavors (currently footnotes #1 and #8 in the article). For now, he has worked with a lot of famous people but per WP:NOTINHERITED he does not gain notability from them. Per WP:NBUSINESSPERSON he needs more reliable and significant coverage in his own right because he runs a relatively small operation. WP:ANYBIO is a problem too, because running a viable business just isn't enough. This all makes the article look like an attempted promotion of his business. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:43, 6 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep or weak delete. I don't really know enough about the reliability of Nigerian newspapers to say for sure. I would have thought that "Pulse" (source 8) is not reliable and so could not qualify to count toward notability. I think that the Guardian (number 1) is, and so would count, and I also found another in depth piece on him in Vanguard, which I also think is reliable. So if Pulse is reliable as DOOMSDAYER520 implied, then I think it would pass the threshold for qualifying. However, if it isn't, which I tend to think, then I don't think it would pass. Maybe this requires more commentary from someone with some knowledge or familiarity about Nigerian media publications. Chagropango (talk) 06:09, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previously closed by Liz as "delete". Reopening per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2023 January 24 in order to gather more opinions.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:18, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: WP:REFBOMB but no WP:SIGCOV. UtherSRG (talk) 12:30, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  Delete agree with the ref bombing, lots of citations for not much bang. No GNG found. Oaktree b (talk) 16:22, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment — the Vanguard source is likely to be sponsored (no byline). The other sources are mostly interviews (probably accumulated for the sake of owning a Wikipedia entry). Best, Reading Beans (talk) 16:32, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. The coverage made available does not satisfy WP:GNG. No objection to recreation in draftspace or userspace. Frank Anchor 16:46, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete lack of secondary, reliable sourcing to satisfy the GNG. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 11:14, 6 February 2023 (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.