Deletion of Wale Ojo

Comment: my !vote is a keep due to information available on cyber-space which proves subject of the article is worthy of a stand alone article on the encylopedia. Now notwithstanding, this AFD is not in anyway "laughable" as termed by {{u|Oluwa2Chainz}}, reasons being, notability is relative & very subjective as so persons you may consider notable might not be notable to {{u|Thomas.W}} and if he decides to put it up for deletion he is very much entitled to do so. But just as said by {{u|Darreg}}, {{u|Jamie Tubers}}, {{u|Versace1608}} the articles subject is quite notable and no matter the standard you have set @{{u|Thomas.W}} to assertain notability of any persons with stand alone articles, wikipedia provides us with primary yardsticks such as  &  the article/its subject clearly passes this. This would end in a "Keep" obviously, you really aint need to push this any further, with that said, i would also want to commend your efforts on the fight against undisclosed paid editing & Sock puppets it is duly recognized
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BASIC)

Comment: The subject passes  and has had significant role in multiple films and television series both in Nigeria and England. This http://theguardianlifemagazine.blogspot.com/2010/01/from-uk-wale-ojo-returns-for-streets-of.html blog source by ''The Guardian (Nigeria)|The Guardian'' newspaper discusses the subject and isn't an interview. The fact that the subject has won or have been nominated for multiple awards also shows that he is notable
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NACTOR)