Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obi Iyiegbu

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. Tone 10:16, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Obi Iyiegbu

[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)

BLP tagged for notability since July. The article makes no real claim of notability and the sources provided don’t suggest it either. I didn’t find anything else to help build a case for inclusion. Mccapra (talk) 21:45, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 21:45, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 21:45, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep – The subject is famous for being rich but there's actually lots of coverage under his COMMONNAME; Obi Cubana. Princess of Ara 14:38, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is that in sources you think are reliable and independent? Mccapra (talk) 17:44, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, [1][2][3] [4][5][6][7][8][9][10].

Keep – something prompted me to search for his name and somehow, I found this wikipage. The entity is notable for philanthropic acts. I’ve moved the page to his known name. Reading Beans^{Talk to the Beans} 07:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Needs clearer consensus especially with regard to sourcing.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 06:50, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Multiple reliable, third party, secondary sources that are explicitly about the subject exist, thus it meets WP:GNG. Fieari (talk) 07:42, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep to my genuine surprise. There are multiple examples of significant coverage in reliable, independent sources such as BBC News and Sahara Reporter. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:43, 30 January 2022 (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.