Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric M.K Osiakwan

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:41, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Eric M.K Osiakwan

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

non notable and promotional. Did not found or build any notable companies; consulting for various agencies is not notability , One references is his grad school alumni page, the other is citeseer profile. The web has a number of similaryuneliable bio notices, and refs to various articles he wrote, but I do not see anything more. . Borderline notability combined with clear promotionalism is an equally good reason. Small variations to the notability standard either way do not fundamentally harm the encycopedia, but accepting articles that are part of a promotional campaign causes great damage. Once we become a vehicle for promotion, we're useless as an encycopedia. The relevant policy here is NOT DIRECTORY DGG ( talk ) 16:01, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 22:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 22:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 22:15, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as my searches News, Books and Highbeam immediately found some links but certainly nothing for a better article. Notifying Wikicology for some African insight. SwisterTwister talk 22:16, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete fails WP:GNG. I can't see any evidence of notabiity. Wikic¤l¤gy^{t@lk to M£} 07:49, 26 November 2015 (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.