Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elechi Amadi

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 wasSpeedy keep - notability is clear in this case, all opinions are keep. Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 10:48, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Elechi Amadi

not noteworthy or well-known Igbogirl 01:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

• Holy Christ Strong Keep Bad nomination dude. This is a very well-respected author. He even has an entry in Britannica. Also, not that it matters much (or at all), but I've heard of him and I have no connection to Nigeria or anything. It would be sad to delete this article. That aside, it does need a good cleanup.UberCryxic 02:22, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Keep Very noteworthy author with scores of popular and critical reviews. ~ trialsanderrors 02:30, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Emphatic keep - Amadi is a major figure in African post-colonialist literature; this is rather like nominating Walt Whitman or David Mamet for deletion. -- MarcoTolo 02:31, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - anyone in "Who's Who of Twentieth Century Novelists" gets my vote. Eldereft 02:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and expand! Hopefully we can get rid of those red links. Stubbleboy 03:08, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Note I also don't quite understand why someone with a username with Igbogirl would be nominating such an article for deletion. Does your name have any significance with the Igbo people?? Stubbleboy 03:12, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, definitely! Perhaps the nomination was a personal thing? --Fbv65edel / ☑t / ☛c || 03:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Strong keep - we need more like this to counter systematic bias. -- Beardo 03:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, well known author, it's very obvious that he is notable, no doubt. Do some googling for goodness sake, if Britannica has it, all the more Wikipedia should have it. --Terence Ong _{(T | C)} 09:26, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

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.