Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oma Akatugba

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. Consensus is for deletion. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:52, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oma Akatugba

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

After trying to make this vaguely resemble an encyclopaedia article, I have lingering doubts about the subject's notability. Adam9007 (talk) 00:39, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More secondary sources have been added, and the body of the article has further been improved to remove any form of self promotion.Kelvinsage1 (talk) 21:56, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as this is frankly speedy G11 material, nothing comes close to establishing substance. SwisterTwister talk 23:16, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete after improving, article has degraded. Cotton2 (talk) 07:12, 25 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:32, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:32, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:32, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 02:32, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone 08:04, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - no evidence of notability. Giant Snowman 18:07, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - a few of the 'sources' used are unreliable (e.g. YouTube, Blogspot) and there is no evidence to suggest WP:GNG can be met Spiderone 07:40, 30 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no evidence of notability, unreliable sources. Fenix down (talk) 09:22, 30 August 2016 (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.