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.
Delete I agree with the analysis posted above by scope_creep. None of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability and clearly
Lynndonald above has misinterpreted what is meant by a source being "independent of the subject" which doesn't just mean that the topic organizations is functionally independent from the publisher, but also that the source contains "Independent Content" as per
WP:ORGIND. Topic fails GNG/
WP:NCORP.
HighKing++ 18:33, 23 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Keep: I don't think that
WP:ORGIND applies very well here. A couple of these sources are junk, sure, but is coverage "routine" just because a newspaper routinely covers news? A 5.3 million Series A is fairly respectable (this is not just a couple guys in a garage). jp×g20:53, 28 November 2020 (UTC)reply
It's respectable. Funding does not directly establish notability, but indicates that a business is doing lots of stuff. Doing lots of stuff is notorious for conferring notability... jp×g17:26, 30 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Can you articulate "they are is no references" better? I see 15 references in the article. I agree most of them do not help the article meet NCORP. I only see one of the current references helping towards NCORP, which is "Confusion Rocks Gokada, Lagos’s Modern Okada" from the Nigerian Tribune. There is also a reference not currently in the article which I think would go towards NCORP,
[2]. However, I don't think these two sources get it over the line, another of like quality would. Nonetheless I don't understand the comment. (nor the personalization).
78.26(
spin me /
revolutions)14:49, 30 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Hi @
78.26: I've already went through them. I never noticed. The references
[3] states:
The murder devasted the company, Nikhil Goel, Gokada’s COO and President told TechCabal. So it is an interview style article and fail
WP:ORGIND. It also a dependent source, as the company is providing the information, not the journalist not going out and finding for themselves. So it fails
WP:SIRS as well. scope_creepTalk16:20, 30 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Yeah, you are correct, although I believe the article is not 100% based upon interview because of the first three paragraphs, and some interspersed information. It isn't a strong source, so I'd say we have 1.5 sources. Too bad we don't have more like what you comment on below, we need more coverage of African topics, and I think this company had a brief but significant impact on Nigeria's capitol, and may so again if regulations/situations change.
78.26(
spin me /
revolutions)16:47, 30 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment "Confusion Rocks Gokada, Lagos’s Modern Okada" from the Nigerian Tribune is a really decent secondary source that is well written, indepth and qualifies as
WP:SIGCOV. However a single source in not sufficing to establish notability. scope_creepTalk16:25, 30 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment@
78.26: I don't think relying on a biking company is necessarily the best way of creating articles for consumption. The main problem is finding what to do. The cultural depth and variety there in Africa is vast and mysterious for the most part, so there is plenty of history, culture, whatnot and so on, there to make millions of articles on WP. The problem for me is identifying what to translate. If somebody could give two dozen articles that were very large and obscure/byzantine in nature, I could make a effort to get them translated professionally. But such a thing doesn't seem to be done. As far as I know there is no wikiproject on it. scope_creepTalk17:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)reply
Delete The sources supporting the article are the usual
WP:REFBOMBing of poor sources that are easy for companies to obtain. The great majority of these are regurgitated press releases or the like and the remainder are
WP:MILL coverage of normal transactions. What coverage is significant is not independent or reliable and vice-versa.
Eggishorn(talk)(contrib)21:41, 1 December 2020 (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.