Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Musa Makaniki

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 keep. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Musa Makaniki

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

Seems to fall under WP:BLPCRIME - he's been acquitted on appeal. World Defense Review article seems grounded in the conviction. National Mirror mention is 4 sentences. Nat Gertler (talk) 17:12, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:47, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:48, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Terrorism-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:48, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Islam-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:48, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:48, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The current leader of Yan Tatsine is likely to have been noted in many Nigerian sources. The riots in Kano in 1980 were very important (I was there!) and the movement continuing after the death of the leader at that time will mean that the current leader will be noticed, This is not just about a crime. --Bduke (Discussion) 20:48, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep and cleanup There seems to be enough coverage of the subject over a sustained period of time to establish notability; I think the article just needs to be worked on to better display such notability. A lot of details are left out, including the reasons for rioting and the subject's acquittal. Returning to the sources and then adding those details should improve the article enough to establish notability more clearly. MezzoMezzo (talk) 04:25, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Davey2010 • (talk) 18:08, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep and big cleanup Agreed with MezzoMezzo. I would just add that unsourced material should be removed. In it's current form the article implies (without source or even direct accusation) that this person committed all these crimes. E.g. the beginning of the last paragraph, 'after the deaths of several hundred...' (paraphrased). Beakermeep^(talk) 13:42, 29 August 2014 (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.