From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Arguments to keep based on assertions carry less weight than analysis of sources. We don't seem to have sources here so have a GNG fail. Tbis means the policy based votes are the delete ones. Note that I was sorely tempted to issue blocks for disrupting the afd with racism allegations. Dial it dkwn please if you want your opinion heard. Spartaz Humbug! 18:22, 24 April 2018 (UTC) reply

Zainab Ali Nielsen

Zainab Ali Nielsen (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't find any significant coverage pre-dating her recent and tragic death. No claim of meeting WP:NMUSIC. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 21:34, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply

  • Delete Searching online for info aside from her death brings up practically nothing, so the subject fails WP:ARTIST. Perhaps an article titled "Death/Murder of Zainab Ali Nielsen" is in Wikipedia's future. But, as of yet, we have nothing that establishes independent notability. - The Gnome ( talk) 22:51, 8 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. MT Train Talk 11:37, 9 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. MT Train Talk 11:37, 9 April 2018 (UTC) reply
  • I disagree with previous comments and am against the deletion. First, Google is not the only source of information, even though I did find news articles that predate her death. Second, online media coverage for African artists is quite limited in Africa and even more elsewhere. In light of this, I doubt that someone can prejudge her notability without looking for diverse sources. -- Maxxies ( talk) 02:54, 10 April 2018 (UTC) reply
You're right about Google. So, I tried AltaVista and Bing, too, with the same results - meaning: no results. I then tried Aliweb and they said they'll get back to me. - The Gnome ( talk) 15:00, 12 April 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Delete None of the available sources above show a single hit. Subject lacks notability. Tapered ( talk) 05:07, 10 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Amended The google search does yield 3 pages of articles about her tragic murder. After that, the articles are not about her. Ergo, no support for her notability. Verdict is still "delete." Tapered ( talk)
Comment I found articles about her from before the murder. Ross-c ( talk) 10:00, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Keep, failure to find sources is a function of bias on the part of Google search algorithms. Abductive ( reasoning) 12:39, 15 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Do you happen to have sources yourself that do not come up in Google searches? If you do, post them up! If you don't, then your argument is null and void, because, if accepted, it could be used in any case where we have no online sources. - The Gnome ( talk) 21:40, 15 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Oh, you imagine that Google is everything, you forget Google is trapped in a US-centered matrix of its own making. [1], [2], [3]. So you can take your filthy WP:Systemic bias nomination and withdraw it. Because this article will not be deleted. Abductive ( reasoning) 00:03, 16 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Perhaps you should improve your attitude. Start by with assuming good faith from your fellow contributors. Then, learn to be more civil. Next, you could be less arrogant about AfD outcomes. No one knows if this article, of any article, will end up staying up or deleted through the AfD process.
As to that essay about " systemic bias" in Wikipedia, to which you linked, I simply do not agree with its (quite broad) assertions. Wikipedia comes in many languages. And notability differs across different cultures; otherwise we would not have different cultures! This is why we have, for example, artists in Arab Wikipedia or politicians in Russian Wikipedia who are not featured in English Wikipedia, and vice versa. In sum, drop the attitude and try to defend the subject's notability per WP:ARTIST or WP:NMUSIC. So far, and even after your contribution, it's not doing too well. Wikipedia gone done the tighten up, baby. Take care. - The Gnome ( talk) 08:53, 16 April 2018 (UTC) reply
No, I will defend the article on the basis of the WP:GNG. Don't try to frame the debate in a WP:battleground attempt to win. Abductive ( reasoning) 06:13, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Well, Abductive, I'm not "attacking" anything or anyone, so your use of words such as "defending", "win", etc, is indicative of your approach to this AfD; not mine. Contrary to what the relevant Wikipedia rule dictates about our behavior in an AfD discussion, you are engaging in personal attacks and boorish behavior. Yet, no one here is your enemy. There is no "battleground" here. We don't have "agendas." So, shape up, calm down, and behave. That's the best advice I can offer. Take it.
Back to the substance: You claimed you see "systemic bias" in this discussion. We cannot find sources outside Google and this proves "systemic bias" on our part, supposedly. I responded above that there are bound to be differences between Wikipedia's of different languages. Got any response? Do you deny this? Do you believe that, for example, Claude François is as well known (notable) in France as he is in Nigeria? I hope not. - The Gnome ( talk) 08:32, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: To evaluate the sources.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Winged Blades Godric 03:27, 16 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Comment Whatever a 'custom date range on Google' is, none of those is a reliable source. Two appear to be promotional websites, and the ostensible newspaper has long since ceased to be a substantial reliable source. Tapered ( talk) 01:27, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Because systemic racism unconscious bias (on the part of Google - I would never accuse a fellow user of systemic racism - note what I am leaving out). For clarification, what I am saying is, every internet site in the third world has a certain breathless, "promotional" sound to it. That doesn't make it unreliable. For example, do you doubt she was signed to a Japanese record label? Abductive ( reasoning) 06:26, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Getting signed by a Japanese record label is proof of notability? Under which specific Wikipedia rule, please?
By the way, you already accused a "fellow user" of racism, but you forget what you write, perhaps. You wrote, you can take your filthy WP:Systemic bias nomination and withdraw it. Now, you write "systemic racism", then strike it, and write instead "unconscious bias", which you assign to Google. But Google cannot be unconsciously guilty of something! They are deliberate and thorough in their plans and operations. You seem confused; better abandon slurs and personal attacks altogether and focus on the discussion proper. - The Gnome ( talk) 08:43, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Promotional is promotional in Tierra del Fuego. The newspaper in question was once a reliable source, as are some other Lagos papers. Its Wikipedia article (well sourced) traces its decline. Tapered ( talk) 05:26, 19 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Ross-c, if you cannot see on your own that the texts in all these links are pure, unadulterated promotion, no one can convince you they are. So I won't try. Take care. - The Gnome ( talk) 08:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
An article titled Murder of Zainab Ali Nielsen could/should probably exist in the near future. But, aside from the murder, this is, on its own, a non-notable subject, according to Wikipedia rules. - The Gnome ( talk) 08:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
I would have no objection to moving the article to that title. Abductive ( reasoning) 23:28, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I am not basing my keep recommendation on the content of the news articles. Just that she has received coverage in notable national publications, and therefore meets WP:GNG. I feel that this discussion has been adversely affected by people who seem to be emotionally invested in the outcome and aren't viewing the decision objectively. Ross-c ( talk) 09:59, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
Well, aside from the substance of your argument, which may be right or may be wrong, it was evident that the discussion would heat up as soon as slurs like "filthy" "racism" (: "systemic bias") surfaced here as "arguments." Let's hope it all simmers down. - The Gnome ( talk) 10:36, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
I didn't use any such terms, nor have I raised issues of linguistic and national inequality within Wikipedia in this discussion. Hence, I don't know why you are raising this with me. I'm concerned that you see this as a battle that you wish to win, rather than an objective discussion concerning whether the article should stay or be deleted. Ross-c ( talk) 12:06, 17 April 2018 (UTC) reply
I'm referring to the hideous commentary by Abductive, as above. I witnessed no inflammatory or emotionally involved attitude from your part at all. (My comment about the promotional nature of the texts you consider as valid sources is a simple disagreements of opinion. Abductive, essentially, accused all who believe the article should be deleted as racists.) - The Gnome ( talk) 12:18, 17 April 2018 (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.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Zainab_Ali_Nielsen&oldid=838154440"