Deletion of Oluwafunmilayo Oni

Comment: Per my rationale above, the most I can find about this subject in the way of reliable coverage is two paragraphs in an interview from ''The Guardian (Nigeria)|The Guardian''. I exclude the rest of the references in the article because they are, in order: a podcast, a group blog, an article from UNICEF that has literally nothing to do with Oni, and a personal blog. Aside from that, I turned up nothing that isn't a blog or an interview. This article is pretty obviously  and should be removed until Oni receives more substantial, reliable, independent coverage. As of right now, fails  by a significant margin
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Too soon (WP:TOOSOON||WP:BASIC)

Comment: Fails  and any notability guidelines as she lacks sustained  and notability is not inherited either per . I will also add that the need for diversity on Wikipedia should not come at the expense of lowered notability standards for certain groups of people
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:SIGCOV||WP:NOTINHERITED)

Comment: Subject does not meet : Notable subjects have attracted attention over a significant period of time. While the Guardian Nigeria is a reliable source, the  requires secondary sources, which this interview is not. Additionally, even were there more and better sources (by GNG definition) that would only create presumption of notability, as in presumably there is sufficient source material with which to write a biography — which does not exist yet. There is nothing that states that two articles means guaranteed notability, so it should not be read as 'multiple' means 'two and in'. This is turning the guideline on its head.  explains further why the current coverage of the subject is insufficient for notability. Others have made valid delete arguments which I won't repeat here
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:SUSTAINED||WP:GNG||WP:WHYN)

Comment: This pains me as the subjects like these need more space on Wikipedia, but she fails  here, since she fails the "they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." part. Besides The Guardian Nigeria one which is , that is pretty much it (my searches brought a passing mention in a book). . She may be notable in the future, but not right now
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC||WP:SIGCOV||WP:TOOSOON)

Comment: The subject is a product of a campaign(Wiki loves women radio) initiated in Nigeria to bridge the information gap that exists about women on the English Wikipedia where amazing women are being invited for radio and then profiled on Wikipedia.. But still the subject passes  and was the center of a very reliable source The Guardian (Nigeria); it's a work in progress as a stub and will be work on more with other reliable sources.  Deleting doesn't ascertain anything, it only worsen the narrative. Thanks
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BASIC)