Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Leo Stan Ekeh

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. (non-admin closure) Exemplo347 (talk) 09:56, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Leo Stan Ekeh

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

The article has no references and most of the claims have been tagged since 2012. From looking through "news" articles, they are either interviews or WP:PRIMARY sources or they reference the alleged fraud WP:ONEEVENT. The entire article reads like a CV. -- HighKing⁺⁺ 14:36, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 10:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:19, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete -- a glorified CV. No indications of notability or significance; associated with a nn company. Wikipedia is not LinkedIn. K.e.coffman (talk) 01:27, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: An individual with a national honour, OFR suggests some claim of notability. These things are not given to just any successful businessman. Darreg (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: @Darreg: that true. Am in support.--MKJ6006 (talk) 10:02, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: we are now seeing keep !votes from editors with no other edits on en-WP than creating promotional articles about non-notable Nigerian bloggers, rappers etc, and !voting keep when articles of that kind created by others are nominated for deletion. Making me believe that we're seeing a group of people engaging in paid editing. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 10:51, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do you really have enough information to suggest paid editing? This sounds like WP:BADFAITH to me. And I hope I'm not part of the "editors" you're implying are engaged in promotional editing, WP:COI and WP:PAIDEDITING is something I've never violated since joining here. Darreg (talk) 18:16, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:16, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep the article needs improvements in quality more than it needs additional references/proof of notability, IMO. Power~enwiki (talk) 07:51, 13 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep. The article needs work, but a BEFORE convinced me he is notable. Covered in Nigerian and international press.Icewhiz (talk) 08:12, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: per Darreg. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:26, 17 May 2017 (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.

Leo Stan Ekeh

zproxy.org