Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Omoha Nduka John

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. czar 17:28, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Omoha Nduka John

[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)

No indication of notability. References to till date do not demonstrate the notability. fails WP:GNG GermanKity (talk) 09:39, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 09:39, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. GermanKity (talk) 09:39, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 09:56, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All the references are independent secondary reliable source and more 90% has significant coverage. Looking at him age (25 years) he accumulated unlimited achievement in life. Vanguard newspaper, Guardian newspaper, punch newspaper, Sunshine newspaper, leadership newspaper are all independent source and he has significant coverage as such I see notability here. There is clear indication it has WP:GNG if you check it well. He done a lot for example his foundation which support thousands youth in Africa on how to expose to entrepreneur. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adabaruku (talk • contribs) 12:02, 3 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Per norm. Slovenichibo (talk) 22:04, 6 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Coverage consists mostly of interviews and PR placements. The bits that could count towards GNG are rehashes of one another so SIGCOV does not exist. Princess of Ara_(talk) 09:40, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article page should be keep, the subject is notable, have highly credible independent sources, and have not violated any of Wikipedia guidelines. If there are typical errors it should rather be corrected. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Researchtoknow (talk • contribs) 19:52, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article should be keep, interviews are part of notability clarification and there has never been any notability without “PR”. Even notability is basically publicity of a figure in regards of importance, the subjects have been verified by numerous independent sources as I can see from there and also was a multiple award winner with recognition. Another feat is been nominated for Forbes class of 2021, those are facts that makes it notable from the neutral part that shows his tendency for WP:GNG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Researchtoknow (talk • contribs) 12:22, 7 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:56, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Hopefully the last relist. Please try to come to consensus in the next 7 days!
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dr. Universe (talk) 21:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nominator, woefully fails GNG criteria for inclusion. The Living love ^talk 06:32, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete agree that the news are weak. Peter303x (talk) 08:59, 28 July 2021 (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.