Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simeon Ekpe
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 14:22, 2 February 2022 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.Revision as of 14:22, 2 February 2022 by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12))
(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
- 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. -- Cirt (talk) 05:35, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Simeon Ekpe (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unreferenced BLP Bio. I found one source in Google News, but it's only a passing mention and doesn't pass WP:GNG. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:34, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:09, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:02, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. It's not a WP:BLP. The article states that the subject died in 2010. I've removed it from Category:Living people. The subject was a judge in a national court of appeal. I believe that this constitutes notability, as long as it is verifiable. Pburka (talk) 01:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:39, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The position is notable. It will be good to have more material, but since the basic notability is verified, it's enough to start with. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs)
- 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.