Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wofai Fada

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. Geschichte (talk) 15:39, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wofai Fada

Wofai Fada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Possible covert UPE/COI article on an actor and comedian that doesn’t fulfill

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 00:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 00:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 00:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Celestina007 (talk) 00:32, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source assessment table:
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG ?
“30 Never Looked So Chic! We Love Wofai Fada's Birthday Glam”		Self published blog with No editorial oversight	Basically announces her birthday.	✘ No
"Talent Management Company Plans Big for Wofai Fada, Akaycentric"		No editorial oversight present	The article focuses on an organization rather than the subject of the article	✘ No
"This fake prophetess comedy skit from Wofai Fada is too hilarious"	it is a short comedy skit of which she appears to have created herself	it’s a comedy video not independent of her	It literally is a mere comedy skit & doesn’t discuss her in any way	✘ No
"As a child, I behaved like a clown –Wofaifada"	It is an interview thus isn’t independent of her	No editorial oversight and it’s an interview hence can’t be considered reliable		✘ No
"People who turned me down now my colleagues –Wofai Fada"	The piece is regurgitating an interview of a different source entirely	it is regurgitating an interview from a different source entirely thus cannot be considered reliable.		✘ No
for Her Network Woman of the Year Awards 2017 revealed"			It’s a list of individuals who are nominated for a non notable award & definitely isn’t significant coverage	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

• Comment — Above is the source assessment used in the article after fake referencing has been removed Celestina007 (talk) 01:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Per analysis done by nominator. Definitely a
  WP:RUNOFTHEMILL. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 16:00, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Delete subject doesn't meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines.Fatzaof (talk) 12:52, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Fails
  WP:GNG. Cuoxo (talk) 14:42, 5 February 2021 (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.