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. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:10, 10 December 2019 (UTC) reply

Rabelani Dagada (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Dagaba's article lacks notability. He has been a candidate for parliament and mayor and an eventual MMC (Member of the Mayoral Committee) for Finance. All these positions do not necessarily guarantee him an article, therefore it fails WP:POLITICIAN & WP:GNG. Lefcentreright Talk (plz ping) 15:29, 2 December 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Lefcentreright Talk (plz ping) 15:29, 2 December 2019 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of South Africa-related deletion discussions. Shellwood ( talk) 15:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC) reply

• Delete. While Joburg is obviously a large and important enough city that we would likely accept articles about its actual city councillors, simply serving on a municipal committee is not sufficient to pass NPOL. Of the 54 footnotes here, he's the bylined author of 16 of them that I've noticed so far — so that's 30 per cent of the sourcing kicked to the curb right there. (He's also likely the author of some of the others, because at least two other sources I've spotchecked are "letters to the editor" that are written in the first person, but fail to have mentioned the name "Rabelani Dagada" before they paywall me.) Several more are primary sources that are not support for notability at all, such as his faculty profile on the self-published website of a university he works for. Several others glancingly namecheck his existence in the process of not being about him in any non-trivial way. This is reference bombing, and we do not take kindly to it — the number of sources here which are actually about him, for the purposes of establishing that he would pass WP:GNG, are (a) literally in the single digits, and (b) purely local and routine and not even beginning to demonstrate a credibly nationalized or globalized claim of importance. Plus the article was created by a WP:SPA with no history of contributing to Wikipedia on any other topic but Rabelani Dagada himself — so this has all the classic hallmarks of being self-promotion even if I can't prove that outright. Bearcat ( talk) 03:53, 3 December 2019 (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.