Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chika Ibeneme
Being the leader of a small, newly registered political party without existing representation in the legislature is not in and of itself a free pass over  — it would be enough for an article if she were the ''subject'' of enough |reliable source coverage to clear  for it, but it is not enough to hand her an automatic inclusion freebie in the ''absence'' of solid sources. But the sources here simply aren't cutting it: #1 and #7 are |primary sources; #2 is a non-notable |blog; #3, #5 and #8 are needless repetition of the same post to a |user-generated discussion forum; #4 verifies a tangential fact about the political party she used to be associated with but fails to mention her name in conjunction at all; and #6 just glancingly namechecks her existence in an article that isn't ''about'' her. This is ''not'' the kind of sourcing that it takes to make someone eligible for a Wikipedia article. And no, this is not a systemic bias issue, either: Nigeria ''does'' have real newspapers that can support a proper GNG pass without needing us to give it some sort of "bad sources are okay because it's Nigeria" exemption
— User:Bearcat, 23:07, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NPOL||WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES||WP:BLOGS||WP:USERG (Wikipedia:Notability)