Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Nigerian traditional rulers

Add links
Source: 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 keep. A merge discussion may be held on the article's talk page if so desired. —fetch·comms 02:36, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Nigerian traditional rulers

List of Nigerian traditional rulers (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This list fails WP:STAND, WP:NLIST & WP:GNG - all entries in the list (with 1 exception) do not have articles - notability of the entries is not established - just because a name appears in a "List of Rulers" does not automatically imply that that person is notable - there are 4 sources referenced to two persons on that list, but these are rather weak to establish notability, as WP:GNG recommends "significant coverage". Amsaim (talk) 21:37, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a start at putting List of Nigerian traditional states into table format and copying content from this one to that, so this article could be turned into a redirect without loss of information. The table needs much improvement - I think there is a fair amount of material scattered around that it could link to. Aymatth2 (talk) 15:00, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, if I understand this rightly, these individuals pass WP:POLITICIAN by dint of their office. If I understand rightly, these individuals are "politicians who have held international, national or sub-national office"; surely a monarch within a larger country holds sub-national office. If we grant my point, there's no real difference between this list and List of current United States governors, because both are lists of sub-national head executives. Nyttend (talk) 16:40, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They are not really politicians with power in the same sense as a Nigerian state governor. More like European aristocrats, still holding the title and perhaps still wealthy but with no real power. Of course, the individuals may well be notable because people are interested in them. See maybe John Seymour, 19th Duke of Somerset for an equivalent in Europe. The problem with the list is that it could wind up huge and very hard to organize, sort of like "List of all European aristocrats from earliest days to the present" or "List of all current US politicians". Aymatth2 (talk) 17:42, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
See Nigerian traditional rulers, which gives a sense of their roles. Akwa Ibom State with a population of about 5 million, has 116 traditional rulers. Extrapolating to the full 36 states with 150 million people would give about 4,000 entries assuming the list is limited to current officeholders, maybe 50,000 if past rulers are included. The number seems reasonable since each community has its traditional ruler, and the extrapolation gives about one traditional ruler per 40,000 people. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:39, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • On reflection, I am not convinced that this article should not be deleted. It is more important to have more articles on the notable traditional rulers and these articles can give details of the current holder of the title and of notable previous holders. Details of the various traditional States also needs to be better covered in WP. --Bduke (Discussion) 00:18, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - This Afd has nothing to do with systematic bias as some have suggested, but it has everything to do with "Write the Article First". Should Wikipedia have a list of Nigerian traditional rulers? Certainly it should. However, that list, like any other list, must adhere to Wikipedia's Policies & Guidelines. If the entries in the list do not have articles, then each entry should have reliable verifiable sources to establish notability. Amsaim (talk) 08:59, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That is an excellent point. Clean-up to remove unsourced redlinks would go a long way to remove the concern that this will turn into a huge unmanageable list. But there will still be redundancy with the sortable List of Nigerian traditional states, so I still prefer a redirect to that list, which in turn will point to articles holding lists for each state. Agree that it is not a systemic bias question, but it is a question of useful and maintainable list structure. Aymatth2 (talk) 14:32, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 00:38, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Notability of the members is established per WP:POLITICIAN (the Traditional leadership is a political structure parallel to, and coexisting with, government in many African countries), red links are allowed if it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future (from WP:STAND), and WP:V should be no problem seeing that they are all alive. As such, we have a list that is largely unreferenced but this should not be sufficient reason to delete. Although maybe no proper AfD argument, this list is also useful because it points out which rulers have no article yet. --Pgallert (talk) 09:29, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Nigerian traditional rulers are not politicians, they have no political power in Nigeria. They are not included within the current Nigerian Constitution of 1999. They are not elected and they do not hold any political office. Thus WP:POLITICIAN does not apply to them. The full and correct WP:STAND guideline that you are referring to stipulates that red links in stand-alone lists must be verifiable ("red-linked entries are acceptable if the entry is verifiably a member of the listed group, and it is reasonable to expect an article could be forthcoming in the future."). The keyword here is verifiability. Red linked entries without any verifiability thusly do not belong in stand-alone lists. Amsaim (talk) 12:54, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As Amsaim says, the "traditional ruler" positions are purely honorary. Their number is expanding fast, presumably to meet demand. Nigerian society is very corrupt and the immensely wealthy elite place high value on status symbols. But this is separate from the question of whether the list itself should be kept. Aymatth2 (talk) 16:12, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Answer both: I doubt these entries are not verifiable. They are just currently not referenced, that's something else. As for notability, to be fair, Wikipedia:Notability (people) does not really cater for these types of leaders, and the POLITICIAN subsection is just the closest match. Generally, traditional leaders are not just honorary. They allocate communal land to individuals, they settle civil court cases, approve marriages, interpret religious questions, and so forth. Rather like a government. Of course not every level should be covered in Wikipedia; any village headman is a traditional leader, like a rather unimportant government employee. But a leader of, say, the Yoruba people represents 30 million individuals and thousands of sqkm of land—that person should surely be notable. The comparison to John Seymour, 19th Duke of Somerset is not so bad, just that these leaders still have the sort of power dukes had centuries ago. They must bow to certain higher authorities but do have considerable power over their tribe. BTW, if succession is not straight-forward, traditional leaders are elected, cp.e.g. Adedotun Aremu Gbadebo III. --Pgallert (talk) 09:12, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
During this debate I have been starting articles for traditional states and rulers - including Egba Alake and Adedotun Aremu Gbadebo III - and plan to continue. There are two very distinct groups: rulers of traditional states (maybe 100) and "traditional rulers" (more like 3,000 and rising). Both are purely ceremonial positions with no legal authority, but the first group seems more interesting than the second. I took the liberty of adjusting the lead to this article to say the list "does not include prior rulers or newly created titles." Prior rulers will anyway be listed in articles such as Borno Emirate, and newly created positions are just expensive status symbols. (Let's forget about "village headmen" - this is not in any way a primitive society.)
Obviously there are notable traditional rulers, and perhaps most current rulers of traditional states are notable in their own right: people tend to be interested in aristocrats and their activities are reported in the papers. My concern is that the list in this article is simply a random subset in random sequence of entries from the sortable List of Nigerian traditional states. I see no reason to maintain two lists. This one should redirect to List of Nigerian traditional states. Aymatth2 (talk) 13:58, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep -- I see a third or more of these traditional leaders have separate web pages. The wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of facts. But this is a focussed list, not an indiscriminate collection. Geo Swan (talk) 20:35, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The sequence seems a bit random. I can't figure it out. Any problem sequencing the list by state? Aymatth2 (talk) 01:01, 13 September 2010 (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/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Nigerian_traditional_rulers&oldid=1086074861"