Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Oronsaye

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 Charles Oronsaye and draftify Africana Couture. Clear consensus not to retain either in mainspace, and significant enough opposition to delete Charles Oronsaye outright. Daniel (talk) 04:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Oronsaye

[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)

This could have gone back to draft space or been redirected to the company, but looking at that article, I'm not sure they meet N:ORG and have bundled it here. The sources for both Oronsaye and Africana Couture are churnalism and pay to play sources that are not independent of what he or the company says. I see no evidence of N:ORG or biographic notability. Probably also some UPE in play here as well.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Companies, Fashion, and Nigeria. Star Mississippi 16:01, 14 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Star Mississippi for your feedback and for taking the time to review the article. I appreciate your concerns regarding the notability and sources for Oronsaye and Africana Couture. I understand the importance of maintaining high standards on Wikipedia.

To address your points, I will carefully reevaluate the sources used in the article. However I’d like to mention that in Nigeria those are some of the most credible independent publications, and ensure that they meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines.

If, after the review, there are still concerns about notability or the reliability of sources, I am open to discussing specific improvements or additions that would help strengthen the article. Alternatively, if redirecting to draft space is deemed more appropriate, I am willing to explore that option as well.

Your insights are valuable, and I am committed to working collaboratively to ensure the article meets Wikipedia's standards. Please feel free to provide specific suggestions or concerns, and I will do my best to address them in constructively. WizzWriter (talk) 10:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bearcat can we please collaborate on this? WizzWriter (talk) 16:32, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixing your ping so @Bearcat receives it. Star Mississippi 16:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Bearcat: can we please collaborate on this? WizzWriter (talk) 16:39, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What on earth do you imagine that I could possibly bring to any kind of "collaboration" on a person who has absolutely nothing to do with any of my known areas of expertise? Like, what's he got to do with Canadian film, television, music or literature? Bearcat (talk) 16:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies, I thought you’d be able to guide me through this situation given that you’re an experienced editor and have previously edited the Africana page in the past. I’ll look for a Nigerian editor I can collaborate with on this. WizzWriter (talk) 16:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fair enough. Thanks for the props, but as a rule if you're looking for help in salvaging an article you're always better off looking for people with some established expertise in the relevant subject areas — Nigerians, for example, are a lot more likely to have access to databases of archived Nigerian media coverage that might help improve a Nigeria-related article's sourcing, whereas I have nothing of the sort. For a Canadian topic, I'd be a good guy to approach, because I have the resources to find deep Canadian media coverage all the way back to the 1800s — but for a Nigerian topic, I'd be strictly at the mercy of Google, and have no special ability to find anything you didn't already find on Google. And just for the record, the only thing I ever actually did to the Africana Couture article was remove a redlinked category — but I didn't get there from "expertise in African fashion", I got there from "cleaning up redlinked categories". Bearcat (talk) 17:03, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see, thank you for breaking this down for me. WizzWriter (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Afí-afeti:, I don’t want to be a bother but I’ve seen your edits in a lot of Nigerian Wikipedia pages. Would you mind collaborating with me on this? WizzWriter (talk) 16:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi could we also explore the possibility of moving both the articles on Charles and Africana Couture to the draftspace where I can work with other African editors collaboratively to make it better and meet all Wikipedia guidelines? WizzWriter (talk) 15:34, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We definitely can. That's why we encourage draft space. It allows editors time to work on the articles with less risk of deletion. Star Mississippi 03:32, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi. Thanks for considering that. I’ll make sure to take note for the future articles I’ll write. Would it be okay for me to proceed and move the articles to the draftspace or is it more appropriate for you to do it? WizzWriter (talk) 21:29, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Charles Oronsaye and Draftify Africana Couture: The former utterly fails WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO, while the latter might pass GNG if properly re-written. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:52, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: With the most recent !vote, draftify is contested, so now a clear consensus needs to form for it to be closed that way. Relisting to generate a more solid consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 12:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Africana Couture: Doesn't seem to be notable outside of the company, as coverage is solely about the company when it mentions him. Refs are flimsy. Oaktree b (talk) 16:01, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 03:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete both articles, utter churnalism. Wikipedia is not a platform for promotion. None of the references are sufficient to meet our notabilty guidelines. HighKing⁺⁺ 11:26, 30 January 2024 (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.