Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oladipupo Timothy Clement

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oladipupo Timothy Clement

[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)

Fails WP:GNG, WP:NAUTHOR or WP:ANYBIO. Sources are either passing mentions, unreliable, dependent on the subject, PRs, etc. Nothing to establish WP:BASIC here. Overall, very non-neutrally written and promotional. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 21:59, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Businesspeople, and Nigeria. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 22:18, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: PROMO. Flowery language used in the sources doesn't fill me with hope. I don't find any that don't appear to be promotional. Oaktree b (talk) 01:10, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not only is the article promotional, the sources cited do not give an in-depth coverage of the topic. Some sources only talk about how he did this and that, or how his business did this and that. Other sources are mere "trival" and passing metions of the subject. Doesn't seem to pass WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO to me. ZyphorianNexus (talk) 02:12, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Article is lased with PR releases and puff pieces. GNG is not meet. Best, Reading Beans 10:00, 5 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly feel like this one should be speedy delete under G11. Might tag later. Alpha3031 (t • c) 13:05, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just did that, only for it to get reverted. Note that both links will not work if this is deleted JuniperChill (talk) 22:19, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and Reading Beans. Non-notable subject. Versace1608 ^{Wanna Talk?} 15:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Article lacks reliable & independent sources. Also promotional language and trivial mentions raise concerns about notability. Waqar💬 17:12, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been totally re-written, and all necessary observations have been implemented. Thank you all. Akowe1975 (talk) 07:02, 9 May 2024 (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.