Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Titas Brian Ahumuza

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 14:51, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Titas Brian Ahumuza

[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)

promotional article on fashion promotor. All of the references I checked is promotional ,not informative, or is a pretend interview wherethe person says as he pleases. Awards given for the purposes of allowing figures in an industry to claim they've received one are advertising, not information. I recognize the difficulty of separating advertising from genuine content in this subject field, but this is I think so far on the advertising side that it cannot beusefuly reritten. See adjacentAfD on one of his promotional projects. DGG ( talk ) 23:52, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:30, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:30, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 05:31, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a non-notable businessman.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I understand the concerns about promo, but being interviewed by The Independent [1], which is a significant Ugandan newspaper, is not trivial, nor is his work being covered by The Observer [2]. Apparently, Cîroc liquor thought him prominent enough to be a brand ambassador [3]. I've had some experience with African media, and when they do features on such "promising" types they can tend to be uncritical, but it should not be mistaken for pay-to-write coverage. -Indy beetle (talk) 07:07, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep even when interviews are not counted but there are other credible /secondary source references which have a coverage of him.Side deans (Side deans) —Preceding undated comment added 09:27, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Indy beetle, interviews don't count towards notability as they aren't independent of the subject. Java Hurricane 06:49, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:51, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete GNG fail. No sources could be found. Java Hurricane 06:50, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Really? No sources [4]? -Indy beetle (talk) 06:56, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  Doesn't count towards GNG as it seems to be a "trivial mention". GNG requires non-trivial mentions in sources independent of the subject. Java Hurricane 07:29, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - [5] -Indy beetle (talk) 07:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Promotional + only 1 source. GNG needs multiple independent sources. Java Hurricane 07:42, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've explained the problems with identifying African media as promotional. The author is a regular writer and photographer for The Observer, one of the largest private newspapers in the country. -Indy beetle (talk) 09:07, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indy beetle, then no reports from the Outlook can be used as it is not independent of the subject. Java Hurricane 10:40, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Very coverage, minor really. Fails WP:BIO and WP:SIGCOV. Very poor sourcing typical of article look establish notability, where none exists. scope_creep^Talk 18:13, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 17:44, 5 June 2020 (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.