Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bernard Odoh

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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:47, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bernard Odoh

[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)

Article about a politician and professor that fails both WP:NPOL and WP:NACADEMIC. Being a nominee for the office of Governor does not give the subject automatic notability. Parts of the article reads like a resume. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politicians, and Nigeria. Jamiebuba (talk) 10:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This subject passes notability WP:NPOL, He not only was a gubernatorial nominee but was one of the three significant ones in the state, He before that has been in political limelight in the state as having contested for the Senate, served as Secretary of State and contested twice for Governor. The subject has attained a significant coverage

QeenAnn (talk) 06:41, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Candidates who fail to be elected do not pass WP:NPOLITICIAN. Those who are current nominees are not inherently notable, and an article on them for such a presumed reason may be considered to be an election leaflet, thus WP:ADMASQ 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 06:49, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: The subject has occupied a notable political office of Secretary to the State Government. An equivalent of a US Secretary of State Government . This does not pass WP:NPOL?
QeenAnn (talk) 07:20, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Struck !vote. One editor one !vote 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 07:24, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that note about striking a !vote has now been orphaned. It is in the history, however. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 18:23, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@QeenAnn You're a little off. He didn't hold the equivalent of US Secretary of State, he held the equivalent of a state government version like Oklahoma Secretary of State. Usually, a state-wide appointed office is evidence of notability, but not quite the presumption of notability WP:NPOL gives for state-wide elected office. However, an appointed state-wide official with coverage for other activities may meet WP:GNG. TulsaPoliticsFan (talk) 17:57, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did not say US Secretary of State, I said US Secretary of state government like Texas Secretary of State. They're quite different and yet similar offices on different levels of government. Even at that the candidate in question has coverage for other electoral activities as well before and after occupying the office QeenAnn (talk) 14:27, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@QeenAnn No, you did not. What you said was The subject has occupied a notable political office of Secretary to the State Government., which is defined as a high-ranking appointed executive branch official in the article Secretary to the State Government.

Appointed officials are rarely, if ever, notable in a Wikipedia sense. This one is not one that that rare breed. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 15:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Borderline keep: The subject has occupied a notable political office and sources appear to meet GNG. JoinFluffy250 (talk) 17:23, 18 September 2023 (BST)
Keep: Appears to meet notability, has held political office and it feels like removal might be US-centric. BHC (talk) 01:17, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:12, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:22, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: clearly meet criterion 3 of WP:NACADEMIC. Dfertileplain (talk) 19:26, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: BLP, fails GNG and NBIO. No WP:IS WP:RS show WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth to meet GNG and NBIO, the NPOL is without merit as Timtrent showed, and ACADEMIC point is completely unsuported. Keep voters provide no sources. BEFORE showed nothing. BLP clearly states, Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources. // Timothy :: talk 17:08, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep satisfies NPOL; held a cabinet level position in a state government of a federal system. Comments above with regard to "appointments" are not correct - other than the President, the entire US executive is apppointed - no one argues anywhere that the *appointed* members of US cabinets at federal or state level are not notable under NPOL, Nigeria is no different. Regards,--Goldsztajn (talk) 13:29, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cough..."other than the President" and Vice-President! Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 21:15, 7 October 2023 (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.