Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oladele Olasoji Ajilesoro

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. bibliomaniac15 04:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Oladele Olasoji Ajilesoro

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Oladele Olasoji Ajilesoro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

As explained at the bottom of this BBC article, chieftancies are given out on a discretionary basis. I've seen nothing to indicate that this particular honorary chief is a notable individual. The editor of the article has moved this from draftspace, circumventing AfC where it has been repeatedly declined and speedily deleted. They have not engaged with any of the messages on their talk page. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ethnic groups-related deletion discussions. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

• Delete — subject of article lacks in-depth significant coverage in reliable sources.Celestina007 (talk) 11:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
• Delete. The subject fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO. He isn't discussed in any of the article's sources. A Google search of him doesn't show coverage in reliable sources.  Versace1608  ^{Wanna Talk?} 14:05, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
• Delete If the article cannot pass AfC it should not exist. I still think we need to require all articles to go through AfC, although considering most of our worst sourced articles were created in 2005-2008 the AfC requirement will not fix that huge glut.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:26, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

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.