Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kayode Adegbulugbe (2nd nomination)

Kayode Adegbulugbe

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Just as non-notable per WP:BIO as he was two weeks ago, but as an obvious sock/meatpuppet has removed the db-repost speedy tag, here it is again at AFD. Article creator never responded to questions about use of multiple accounts at their user talk page. Perhaps this AFD will end quickly with a db-repost, once the two accounts have been blocked for sockpuppetry. In the meantime, a WP:BEFORE search turns up only the same gushing paid puff pieces, primary sources (such as interviews), and passing mentions. Wikishovel (talk) 14:41, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Engineering, and Nigeria. Wikishovel (talk) 14:41, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First off, what evidence do you have that I have multiple accounts? Secondly, I did contest the speedy deletion before the notice was removed, and this is exactly what I said.

"This page should not be speedily deleted because Kayode Adegbulugbe is a reputable individual who has made great impact and contributions to Nigeria both economically and socially. He has displayed his knowledge and expertise in the development and production of Nigeria's oil and gas. He has also been a key figure in humanitarianism with his philanthropic activities, which have helped the lives of a lot of people. Kayode is credible enough to be on Wikipedia, considering the several media platforms that has covered some of his activities and background. If it is with regards to the references or content in general, they can always be adjusted, which is why every article on Wikipedia is always up for update and improvement. I am particular about ensuring that this article stays because it is deserving."

Your statement here is highly accusatory, and you have drawn conclusions with very poor judgment. What is your reason for wanting this article deleted? Have you carefully gone through the article and the references? I am starting to sense some kind of discrimination on your part. You have accused me wrongly and haven't given any tangible reason for wanting the article removed.

From what I know, every article is up for improvement and correction. You could point out what is wrong so it gets fixed, or you could even make those corrections. That's why we are all here. To make contributions. TJO28 (talk) 14:54, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]