Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politicians

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Politicians. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Politicians|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Politicians.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Please see Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Politics for a general list of deletion debates on related issues.

Politicians

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 speedy delete. CSD G7 Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Congress Chhodo Yatra

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

Fails WP:GNG ( There is no such Yatra officially. The user who created the page is a supporter of the ruling party [1] which is like an attack on the opposition. Any page on Wikipedia must be in accordance with Wikipedia's policy and fairness. ) PravinGanechari (talk) 08:13, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. PravinGanechari (talk) 08:13, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I don't support any party. If you want so I can change my mood and delete it. Contributor008 (talk) 08:20, 4 October 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.

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. WP:SNOW. The nominator gets the point, no need to continue piling on. (non-admin closure) Curbon7 (talk) 19:22, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Shirley S. Kastor

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

State legislator does not pass WP:NPOL. The guide allows for "state–wide office" which is taken to mean "Constitutional offices". State legislators do not usually meet NPOL without WP:SIGCOV. Bruxton (talk) 23:47, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Wyoming. Bruxton (talk) 23:48, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. WP:NPOL also covers people who "have been members of legislative bodies" at the state level, i.e. state legislators like Kastor. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:10, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - WP:NPOL says that individuals who ...have been members of legislative bodies at those levels meets the criteria, with state-level specifically being one of those levels. The article's subject was in the state-level legislature, so meets WP:NPOL. - Aoidh (talk) 00:50, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Article satisfies WP:NPOL. Ⓩⓟⓟⓘⓧ _Talk 01:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment "state/province wide" is the wording in the NPOL guideline. This person represented Uinta in the Wyoming House of Representatives not in a state wide office. NPOL does not offer automatic notability to this person. Bruxton (talk) 01:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels is the relevant part that is met here. The Wyoming Legislature is the legislative body at the state-wide level, and he was a member of that legislative body. That is exactly what WP:NPOL is looking for. It is not a criteria that they themselves represent the entire state in the legisiature; if that were the case their national counterparts in the United States House of Representatives would also fail that criteria since they also generally only represent a part of the state, not the entire state. - Aoidh (talk) 03:24, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Extraordinary Writ. There is longstanding consensus that state legislators are notable. Mccapra (talk) 02:53, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
'Keep Verified member of the Wyoming House of Representatives. Passes WP:NPOL. --Enos733 (talk) 05:23, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per the conversation the nominator and I had about this topic on my talk page. --Slugger O'Toole (talk) 15:07, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and close per WP:SNOW. Clearly passes WP:NPOL.4meter4 (talk) 19:06, 4 October 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.

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!} 19:13, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Haji Idress Palh

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

No claim to notability, and it does not look as if it has ever been sourced. For a while, there was a source in the form of a book published by "Books, LLC"; that's a company that prints Wikipedia articles. The title of the book is Chief Ministers of Sindh; Muhammad Ayub Khuhro, Allah Bux Soomro, Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi, Pir Ilahi Bux, Haji Idress Palh, Mumtaz Bhutto but the article has never claimed that Palh was Chief Minister of Sindh – and he wasn't. Being a union council member is not a claim to notability.

The article was first created as a copy of Ghulam Mustafa Jatoi, and then it was redirected to that title; after a year, the redirect was replaced with the current text. bonadea contributions talk 17:32, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Pakistan. bonadea contributions talk 17:32, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a non notable local figure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mccapra (talk • contribs) 18:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete Not notable and can't find any sources. Contributor008 (talk) 17:28, 5 October 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.

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. WP:TNT applies. ✗plicit 14:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Martin Abucha

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

Fails GNG and NPOL. Ministerial position is an appointment and no election was involved. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 15:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Politicians. Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 15:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
TNT: A cabinet minister is an WP:NPOL-conferring position, so he is notable. However, the article is better off being WP:TNTed and started again, as it is of practically irreparably poor quality. Curbon7 (talk) 18:24, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I can handle writing up the new version, as I have experience writing about South Sudanese government ministers. Curbon7 (talk) 01:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That would be wonderful. I created a barebones stub at Talk:Martin Abucha/Temp which is meant to be used in place of the copyvio. It could stand a good dose of expansion and improvement. Whpq (talk) 02:02, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:46, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~*Keep~~ the subject is notable and the statements in the article are clearly verifiable. Deletion is not cleanup. I will tidy it up now but there’s no need at all for deletion. Mccapra (talk) 18:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~Keep~~ - Mining minister is a position in the national government's cabinet. WP:NPOL is clearly met. There is no requirement for the position to be elected, and I would be surprised if any cabinet level position in any government in the world was an elected one. I disagree with the sentiment expressed above that TNT applies. It is not a well-written article but it is not in such an irredeemable shape that requires deletion to resolve. -- Whpq (talk) 19:08, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - After further investigation, there is significant copyright violations from the initial version. A fresh article from scratch without foundational copyright issues would be better. -- Whpq (talk) 19:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  sounds better Okello Justine (talk) 08:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:TNT. There isn't really anything worth salvaging here since it's all copyvios. Subject might be notable though. Waddles 🗩 🖉 19:49, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I’ve struck my !vote in the light of potential copyright issues. A clean start may be best after all. Mccapra (talk) 19:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
isn't there a way i can rework on that martin abacha article again? i wanted to correct the mistakes but i cant even tap on the article Okello Justine (talk) 07:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Answered on editor's talk page. Whpq (talk) 13:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete for Now: She is notable as she is a minister in Cabinet of South Sudan but there are copyright violations in the article so it have to be deleted. Contributor008 (talk) 17:34, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:TNT, without prejudice against recreation if somebody can write and source a new version properly. Even politicians who pass WP:NPOL aren't exempt from still having to follow all of Wikipedia's other content policies, such as our copyright rules. Bearcat (talk) 21:52, 6 October 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.

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. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 15:16, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Aman

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

Article about a political figure notable only as a non-winning candidate for mayor of a city. As always, candidates do not get Wikipedia articles just for being candidates -- the notability test for politicians is holding a notable office, not just running for one, and a candidate must either (a) demonstrate that he already had preexisting notability for other reasons, or (b) show a credible reason why his candidacy should be seen as much more special than most other people's candidacies. But this demonstrates neither of those things, and is referenced entirely to a mixture of primary sources that aren't support for notability at all (his own LinkedIn, the county elections office) with the purely run of the mill volume and depth local coverage that any mayoral candidate would merely be expected to have in their local media. Nothing here is "inherently" notable at all. Bearcat (talk) 13:22, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Georgia (U.S. state). Bearcat (talk) 13:22, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete failed political candidate, routine employment history otherwise. Oaktree b (talk) 14:16, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete did not win the 2017 Atlanta mayoral election. Coverage does not indicate anything special or unique about his candidacy. --Enos733 (talk) 15:54, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As User Enos733 said, not notable as he didn't win the election. Contributor008 (talk) 09:42, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:NPOL outright. The article also fails WP:GNG. There was some significant coverage in Creative Loafing and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, both of which did go into some detail about him, but outside of those two pieces I can't find any significant third-party coverage, and WP:GNG requires multiple of such references; two doesn't cut it. When you take into account that these are routine candidate pieces from local news sources during an election cycle, it further diminishes the significance of these two references. Per Wikipedia:Run-of-the-mill#Political candidates, this coverage is routine and to be expected, and is not something that shows notability. - Aoidh (talk) 09:36, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It has fail GNG. Gurin Hawa Mota (talk) 11:47, 5 October 2022 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet of Toshikenan, see investigation)[reply]
Delete I agree with the nomination and all the delete comments. Fifthapril (talk) 18:42, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Per above , not notable. Alex-h (talk) 17:05, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete WP:SNOW Lightburst (talk) 00:33, 9 October 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.

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!} 23:29, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Devin O'Malley

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

I don't believe "Press Secretary to the Vice President" is an office that confers any kind of notability. BD2412 T 21:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. BD2412 T 21:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails the multiple part of the secondary sources in WP:NBIO. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 03:58, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not a notable position and without SIGCOV. Lightburst (talk) 15:20, 7 October 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.

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!} 22:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Marius Lazăr

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

“Co-president of a party that has never cracked 0.4% of the national vote” isn’t really a credible claim to notability, and the smattering of press mentions, mostly recycling his quotes, doesn’t do much to boost that. I’d be fine with a redirect to the party, but as a stand-alone article, this is simply overkill. - Biruitorul ^Talk 15:26, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Romania. Shellwood (talk) 16:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
what kind of mentions would be notable? Bogdy23636374478 (talk) 15:16, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
delete Certainly a thorn in the side of politicians, but just not enough for our purposes. All appear passing mentions. Oaktree b (talk) 17:51, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
KeepingI am of the opinion that the article should remain. The person appears to be notable due to the sources present in the article, more than 10 publications found on the Internet have articles in which it is about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bogdy23636374478 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

KeepThere are many lesser-known public figures in Romania, such as the leader of PER or FDGR, who have wikipedia pages. It would be good to keep this page if it has more than 3 sources.

- See WP:WAX.
- No, the leader of PER (Ecologist Party of Romania) does not have an article. Neither does the leader of FDGR (Democratic Forum of Germans in Romania).
- Please demonstrate that Lazăr fulfills WP:POLITICIAN. — Biruitorul ^Talk 07:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul-J%C3%BCrgen_Porr FDGR leader have an article Bogdy23636374478 (talk) 18:45, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not on English Wikipedia. Please demonstrate that Lazăr fulfills WP:POLITICIAN. — Biruitorul ^Talk 05:18, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.mediafax.ro/politic/geoana-despre-excluderea-lui-marius-lazar-din-psd-mi-se-pare-intempestiva-si-abuziva-9387525?jwsource=cl

https://www.hotnews.ro/stiri-politic-8378685-scrisoare-deschisa-catre-victor-ponta-fost-ales-fruntea-partidului-pastrezi-mare-puternic-nu-faci-mic-pui-vrind-nevrind-cosul-liberalilor.htm/amp

https://ziare.com/victor-ponta/presedinte-psd/ponta-despre-excluderea-lui-lazar-din-psd-nu-vreau-sa-plece-nimeni-din-partid-1080994

Marius Lazar is the former adviser to the Deputy General Secretary of Nato, Mircea Geoana. However, Marius Lazar was a prominent leader of the PSD in the period 2007-2010 Bogdy23636374478 (talk) 17:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- None of that really amounts to notability as a politician. Let us know if he ever manages to be elected anything. — Biruitorul ^Talk 05:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:32, 6 October 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.

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 redirect to 2022 United States House of Representatives elections in New York#District 22. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:23, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Francis Conole

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

Fails WP:NPOL. Coverage is routine campaign coverage and he is not otherwise notable. Suggest redirecting to election page and recreating in November if he wins. Marquardtika (talk) 02:41, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Iraq war vet doesn't make him notable, potential politician isn't notable either. Wiki isn't for promoting your campaign, which I think was the intent of the article. Oaktree b (talk) 02:49, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Military, Iraq, and New York. —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 03:35, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment do we have other examples where we've deleted or redirect an article for a politcal candidate from a major party? I only ask because I've noted to remove articles for candidates in the past but they were always in a minor party and my gut say we should keep this article since he's a candidate with a lot of coverage. But if we have examples of where we've removed similar articles in the past then I'm all for keeping things consistent and fair. Dr vulpes ^{(💬 • 📝)} 04:23, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:POLOUTCOMES. It is usual that candidates are redirected to the campaign page about the election, in this case 2022_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections_in_New_York#District_22. If you look at the archives page for politicians, there are many examples of candidates redirected or deleted. - Enos733 (talk) 04:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To add on to this, this is what the notability guideline says for "substantial coverage" that would be required to pass for those who haven't held office or been elected to office:
Generally, a person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books in that field, by historians. A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists. An actor who has been featured in magazines has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple magazine feature articles, by magazine article writers. An actor or TV personality who has "an independent biography" has been written about, in depth, in a book, by an independent biographer.

I don't think such independent coverage exists for this person. Duonaut^{(talk | contribs)} 04:40, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NPOL. May pass later, or if he becomes a notable perennial candidate, etc. and in that case undeletion may be in order. But I would say that as most coverage surrounds his campaigning and coverage of his service as a policy advisor is minimal he does not pass NPOL. Duonaut^{(talk | contribs)} 04:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2022 United States House of Representatives elections in New York as is longstanding standard practice for the vast majority of unelected political candidates. We do not need to host tens of thousands of barely disguised campaign brochures. If this person wins in November, the article can be recreated at that time. Cullen328 (talk) 04:34, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2022 United States House of Representatives elections in New York per WP:POLOUTCOMES and Cullen328's reasoning. Best, GPL93 (talk) 13:59, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2022 United States House of Representatives elections in New York#District 22, no reason not to have the more specific redirect. Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to 2022 United States House of Representatives elections in New York#District 22. Djflem (talk) 19:02, 3 October 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.

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. Clear consensus against keeping, not so clear consensus for deletion. But because there's no one alternative to deletion (merge, redirect...) that has gained traction, straight-up deletion is the most consensual outcome. People remain free to seek consensus to incorporate the material of this erstwhile dab page into other pages, or to recreate a redirect, which can be contested. The content of this dab page was: Barack Obama, The first Black president (Toni Morrison), African heritage of presidents of the United States, List of heads of state of Haiti, African-American candidates for President of the United States, African-American presidents of the United States in popular culture. Sandstein 11:59, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

America's first black president

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

Should be removed under WP:NOPAGE. The page creation appears to have been a joke [2] about Bill Clinton and the topic is better covered in the article African-American candidates for President of the United States. SiliconRed (he/him • talk) 15:01, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. DrIdiot (talk) 15:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this is simply not needed. Amply covered in the Obama article. I'd almost hazard a guess that literally anyone on the planet knows who Obama is and what he did. Had there been 12 black presidents, I could see the need for the article. That's just not the case. Oaktree b (talk) 15:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As nominator: Noting that the article topic is probably referring to a specific Toni Morrison quote which I've added to the article: A quote by Nobel laureate Toni Morrison, who called Bill Clinton "the first Black president", saying, "Clinton displays almost every trope of blackness: single-parent household, born poor, working-class, saxophone-playing, McDonald's-and-junk-food-loving boy from Arkansas". I still think delete but maybe this sways opinions, plausibly the quote is a more compelling WP:PRIMARYTOPIC than the literal interpretation. SiliconRed (he/him • talk) 15:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:43, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think that would have been an interesting tidbit in the before Obama era. No one is likely to remember that these days and search as a result. Oaktree b (talk) 20:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Iamreallygoodatcheckers^t@lk 16:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Borderline ass-headed creation, especially the entry about Haiti which is a different country. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 16:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and United States of America. –LaundryPizza03 (d c̄) 16:45, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to African heritage of presidents of the United States. Plausible search term. While the heritage article doesn't use the phrase specifically, I think it would be obvious from reading the article that Obama was America's first black president and redirecting here is better than outright deletion. MB 18:45, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. and Oaktree b. A. Randomdude0000 (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with similar disambiguation page Black president. --Woko Sapien (talk) 20:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Black president. I guess like many people, I got here via this Tweet from @depthsofwiki, an account which highlights amusing/surprising Wikipedia pages. The fact that the average person stumbling upon the page will not understand the need for it does not mean that there is no need for it. If not for depthsofwiki, few people would arrive at the page, and most who did so would need it, as follows. Contra Siliconred's nomination above, the Bill Clinton description was not a "joke"; it was a statement made sincerely by a famous African American public intellectual during the Clinton presidency, which was widely reported at the time and commented on subsequently. Contra Oaktree b, it is certainly plausible that someone could vaguely remember that fact and seek clarification of the details from Wikipedia, and we should not make it hard for them to find those details. (The Bill Clinton line was deleted from the DAB by Mountaincirque after the depthsofwiki Tweet and before Siliconred's nomination. Siliconred, after making this nomination, restored the Clinton line, and I have further edited it to conform to MOS:DAB.) By the same token, a reader may have heard one of the claims listed in African heritage of presidents of the United States. Contra LaundryPizza03, for many people "America" does not mean the US. Possibly "America's first black president" should redirect to Obama with a hatnote to "Black president" for other uses. jnestorius^(talk) 20:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with this reasoning & support the specific proposal to hat/redirect/merge. SiliconRed (he/him • talk) 21:43, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree on the proposal to redirect "America's first black president" to Obama with a hatnote to the "Black president" page. The term in question is a plausible search term and the "Black president" disambiguation is superior version to this one. The Meta Boi (talk) 23:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Anything other than keep as an independent disambiguation page. All of the above work. InvadingInvader (talk) 22:17, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for all the reasons given above. I'm not at all convinced that the Morrison quote is notable enough to deserve a standalone article. I don't even think this is a plausible search term. The fact that "America" is itself an ambiguous term means that there's not an obvious redirect target; the principle of least astonishment makes me think that a disambiguation page with quite an odd collection of pages is not useful either. WJ94 (talk) 12:49, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Looks like the page was already Redirected to Barack Obama, so I guess the discussion can simply be closed? (Or was the Redirect out of order?) Cielquiparle (talk) 10:24, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I added the redirect [3], but did not close as I was involved in the discussion (though perhaps I should have waited for someone else to put in the redirect). SiliconRed (he/him • talk) 13:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted the redirect - I think it would be best to let this AfD be closed properly before taking action. I for one would prefer the page to be deleted and not redirected, since the ambiguity of "America" (note the points about Haiti) means that just directing to Barack Obama is not appropriate. The consensus may be that a redirect is appropriate but I'd rather someone uninvolved make that call. WJ94 (talk) 09:06, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Delete: It is a joke about about a person. Contributor008 (talk) 17:42, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all above. Oppose redirect.4meter4 (talk) 05:23, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and oppose redirect/merge. Useless page whether as a disambiguation or redirect as hardly anyone is going to search for this since the answer is obvious. Someone tweeting about the page isn't justification to keep it nor is the Morrison quote really noteworthy enough to deserve more than the sentence it already has in Public image of Bill Clinton. Uhai (talk) 08:59, 6 October 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.

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 no consensus. I don't think a third relisting will elicit more participation in this discussion so I'm closing it as No Consensus. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:51, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Eddy Yawe

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

Not presumptively notable under WP:NPOL, so notability would have to derive from coverage of him as a musician. Of all the cited sources, only [4] is good in terms of reliability, and it is not independent, extensively quoting from the subject. [5] is a short interview. Indeed, this Mbu website has miscellaneous articles on Yawe, but I don't think it's particularly reliable overall; feels like a Ugandan BuzzFeed. Ovinus (talk) 22:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Politicians. Ovinus (talk) 22:27, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Uganda-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This article has reliable some reliable sources which include New Vision and The observer which are national newspapers BalukuBrian (talk) 08:04, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm unable to access [6] for some reason.... Ovinus (talk) 19:32, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep While the article is in need of cleanup, with The Observer (Uganda) piece and others (eg quoted in Al Jazeera during his brother's detention, discussed in Rolling Stone over his personal history and music career) there's enough to satisfy WP:BASIC. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 20:56, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Tried to clean up the article a bit. Will add those sources if this closes as keep, thanks. Ovinus (talk) 11:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment- This piece [7] from The Observer seems okay till you check the Byline which reads as Written by joomlasupport The Jumla Support sounds to me like some news service which makes it dicey for me to relay on the piece rest the Rolling Stone piece and the Aljazeera piece [8] (which is a dead link) is all about his notable brother Bobi Wine, So its a Soft Delete for me. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 09:03, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First, the The Observer is a well established, weekly newspaper in Uganda. Second, Joomla is an open source content management system used for web publishing. There's nothing untoward here, it's simply a reflection that the original journalist's name has not been entered when the article was uploaded and the default system byline appears. Third, if you read the whole attached piece, at the end an email address appears, a simple search of that address leads one to James Tumusiime, a staff member at The Observer from 2006 to 2018 [9]. There's no reason to discount this piece. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 20:07, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well The Observer is considered as one of the RS's but still there is question on the editorial basis that if the staff can provide their email what prevented them from providing the Byline in the article? And what does it takes for the JOOMLA SUPPORT to Support? Rest If we consider The Observer piece as RS too there aren't any other piece available that could be considered as RS so the Observer piece falls in trivial mention in that case. Surya^beej ^⋠talk⋡ 08:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A mistaken entry on a byline is no basis to discount the piece from The Observer; BASIC is satisfied. Regards, Goldsztajn (talk) 19:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:39, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 13:36, 12 October 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.

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. ✗plicit 11:27, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Samrat Yaduvanshi

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

Fails WP:NACTOR, fails WP:NFILMMAKER, fails WP:NMUSICIAN, fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. Do I really need to say that he fails WP:GNG? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:54, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Politicians, and India. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 16:54, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Was on the point of nominating this myself when removing AfC tag in mainspace. Delete per nom. Eagleash (talk) 17:29, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
This article need to be published. Most of the cite are named as anil samrat. As anil samrat and samrat yaduvanshi is the same person. Anil samrat has now changed his name to samrat Yaduvanshi as per numerology. Avanish kumar8271 (talk) 19:42, 21 September 2022 (UTC) copied friom the creating editor's talk page. I believe this must be interpreted as a request to Keep the article. I present this without commentary. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:01, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I can only see Facebook page and TikTok page from Google but nothing worthy from it. Ashavawani (talk) 12:10, 4 October 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.