Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emmanuel Khamis Richard

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. JBW (talk) 22:29, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Emmanuel Khamis Richard

Emmanuel Khamis Richard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Article about a politician that fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Politics, and Africa. Jamiebuba (talk) 18:20, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• No opinion on keeping or deleting, but the assumption in the nomination statement is just weird. Africa consists of lots of countries, so we can't assume that "commissioner" means the same in each of them. Would we make a similar statement about Europe?
  Phil Bridger (talk) 18:52, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment. I don't know the first thing about South Sudanese politics, but I know:

1. Lainya County, of which he is commissioner, has a population of 80,000 according to its Wikipedia entry;

2. the other counties in the state do not have entries for their commissioners that are linked from their articles, and one of the counties doesn't even have a Wikipedia page of its own; and

3. the current article mostly discusses either Emmanuel Khamis Richard's views or county-level issues, except for the mention that he chaired Central Equatoria State's anti-corruption commission.

These, I think, fail

WP:NPOL for me. In a country of 11.5 million people, this feels like a local politician, and so my inclination is towards delete. A quick Google search hasn't really returned anything more notable. But this comes with the obvious caveat that, as I say, I know nothing about South Sudanese politics, and perhaps commissioners have more power than these observations suggest. _MB190417_ (talk) 22:40, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

@MB190417, commissioners are very influential figures in the South Sudanese politics. A lot of information about South Sudan is missing on the internet which is why those outside may not get a lot of information about the truth. As the Wikimedia User Group South Sudan, we are trying to change the narrative by making necessary edits and also creating new pages. The best way is for you as editors to guide and offer edit suggestions instead of deleting pages which frustrates our efforts in puttting all these information together. Bida thomas (talk) 10:50, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimbo Wales: Your comments are exactly why I refrained from endorsing 'Delete', and merely wrote some indicative comments, especially in the fear that this AfD might not attract altogether that many contributors (which is all the more reason to welcome your contributions as well as any insights that the South Sudan User Group can provide). The thrust of my comments are to say that the leader of a similarly-sized local authority (I have open on another page the election history for a borough of 143,000 residents) would not apply in my country, so knowing no more about South Sudanese politics, and finding no sources on Emmanuel Khamis Richard beyond the scope of the county or his views, my inclination is that this entry is too local for inclusion. But I'm happy to be proved wrong if sources can demonstrate otherwise, which so far they have not.

Nevertheless, your comment worries me for two reasons. Firstly, it's perfectly right for articles to be subject to community review if there is considerable concern that articles do not meet the policies of Wikipedia. Wikipedia doesn't function by having select groups having exclusive authority over certain pages: the policies are universal and belong to the whole community. Secondly, I think "change the narrative" is a troubling phrase to use. If you have reliable sources that you can provide to counter the concerns expressed in this AfD, mainly

WP:NPOL, then you should share them here and in the article. If no such sources exist, then Wikipedia's policies apply, and the policies are the only narrative acceptable on Wikipedia. _MB190417_ (talk) 11:42, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete, I'm not familiar with South Sudanese media, so whether he has received an exceptional level of coverage that would cause a
  WP:ROUTINE and thus GNG pass is unclear, but as a County Commissioner Richard is pretty clearly a local politician, meaning he does not pass NPOL. Right now I'm leaning towards deletion, but happy to be proven wrong by anyone who can pick through how prominent the sources are in the South Sudanese media ecosystem. Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:17, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Hello @Devonian Wombat the media sources quoted are credible and mainstream; The City Review, Radio Tamazuj, Eye Radio, among the others. In the South Sudanese Administrative Structure, the commissioner is in the top. Because the hierarchy runs from Country (President) -- State (Governor) --- County (Commissioner). Bida thomas (talk) 10:45, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: As per nom. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 10:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good day @Jamiebuba do you suggest we change the article category or something else? Bida thomas (talk) 10:51, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge into
  WP:SIGCOV as discussed above. I follow South Sudanese politics and had never heard of Khamis, and while the sources cited are creditable, they primarily discuss Khamis in a local context. However, since the commissioner is an important figure within the county, merging at least most of this article's material to a new section on the Lainya County page sees to me to be the best solution. --Leviavery (talk) 22:09, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete: Promotional puff piece about non-notable local official, from an author who I strongly suspect is being paid to produce this and other promotional puff pieces (see his currrent draft submission as an example). --10mmsocket (talk) 16:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting as there seems to be some uncertainty about this article. And I don't understand the comment to Jimbo Wales who I've never seen participate in an AFD discussion before (although he probably has).
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:49, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry: I'm genuinely not sure what happened there either. I was meaning to tag @Bida thomas, and I'm not quite sure how I ended up tagging Jimbo Wales. With apologies to Jimbo. _MB190417_ (talk) 18:17, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Local politician, not meeting notability requirements. Agree with the puff pieces as discussed above. He seems to be good at getting his image out to media, but that doesn't mean notability. Oaktree b (talk) 23:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails

WP:POLITICIAN as it's a local politician without significant press coverage. Belichickoverbrady (talk) 01:46, 14 January 2023 (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.