Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hyacinth Alia

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. ✗plicit 12:19, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hyacinth Alia

[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)

Candidates for political offices are not automatically notable - WP:NPOL - and subject does not appear to meet WP:GNG Melcous (talk) 12:09, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. Kpg jhp jm 12:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Normal priestly stuff, political candidate isn't notable. Even if he wins the election, I don't think the position is notable. Oaktree b (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Oaktree b: How on earth would a state governor be non-notable? Aside from common sense, NPOL states that politicians elected to statewide office are notable. AusLondonder (talk) 17:12, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Nigerian state governor? Wasn't sure how eligible that was. It's not a US state. Oaktree b (talk) 18:21, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why would the fact it's a state of Nigeria instead of a state of the US be relevant to NPOL? AusLondonder (talk) 01:53, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because different political structures with the same name may have different levels of importance? Jahaza (talk) 21:39, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe I'm reading this. And from someone who lives in Canada as well. Does an encyclopedia not cover Nigeria as well as the United States? This is not USApedia. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 20:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:57, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I honestly did not know Nigeria had states; regardless, if this person wins the election, it'll be notable. Otherwise, we don't have notability. Oaktree b (talk) 03:19, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reading your initial comments, I actually thought you were trolling but went to your profile to see your account was created since 2003, and you have autopatrolled rights. I don't know if I should admire your honesty, but it just shows how important our role is in ensuring Wikipedia promotes a more globalized and balanced world. At least now you know Nigeria has states lol. HandsomeBoy (talk) 21:04, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you didn't know then couldn't you have checked in an encyclopedia (I wonder where you can find one of those) before making such a silly comment? Let's all now get back to determining whether the subject is notable, rather than going on about such nonsense. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:27, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Subject is not notable as it stands, if they win the election, they would be. Oaktree b (talk) 01:55, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — fails WP:NPOL. Reading Beans ^{Talk to the Beans?} 07:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. People don't get articles just for running as candidates in future elections they have not yet won — the notability test for politicians is holding a notable political office, not just running for one. But this makes no claim that he has preexisting notability for other reasons independently of a candidacy, and doesn't cite nearly enough sourcing to deem his candidacy more special than everybody else's candidacies. Bearcat (talk) 17:37, 28 May 2022 (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.