Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maxwell Adam Mahama

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. MBisanz ^talk 02:08, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maxwell Adam Mahama (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:MILPEOPLE Sulaimandaud (talk) 09:41, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Move I suggest moving the article to something like Murder of Maxwell Adam Mahama because it appears that the person in question, while not notable himself, was the victim of a notable incident (see links: 1 2 3 4), While the current article isn't very substantial, an extant article may encourage contributors --Hazarasp (talk) 10:02, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete (not Move). Classic WP:ONEEVENT situation here. Were it not for the circumstances of his death, there would be no article. Exemplo347 (talk) 14:39, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ghana-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:01, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Move as suggested by User:Hazarasp as there is a lot of coverage over a period of time, so the oneevent appears to be notable. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 02:04, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But he died 8 days ago - so that "period of time" is hardly evidence of sustained coverage. Exemplo347 (talk) 06:24, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:23, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:13, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete sadly a victim but not noteworthy for a stand-alone article, I dont think a stand-alone article on the murder would pass muster as wikipedia is not a newspaper. MilborneOne (talk) 17:33, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:BIO1E. No need for a rename as the event itself is not sufficiently notable. K.e.coffman (talk) 17:58, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete lacks sufficient coverage in RS to meet GNG. Wikipedia is not a memorial or a repository for all the rotten things that happen. Wikipedia is not a newspaper or the Obits.Dlohcierekim (talk) 10:43, 20 June 2017 (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.