Submission rejected on 10 July 2024 by Drmies (talk). This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Rejected by Drmies 59 days ago. Last edited 0 seconds ago. |
Submission declined on 5 July 2024 by Timtrent (talk). I am taking the unusual step of a second review for this draft. I am taking it because the creating editor has done none of the work required, simply resubmitting it almost unchanged. This is akin to rearranging the deckchairs on the RMS Titanic. My prior review stands. Declined by Timtrent 2 months ago. |
Submission declined on 2 July 2024 by Timtrent (talk). This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia articleβthat is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. All inline links should be removed, please, and turned into references if appropriate, Wikilinks, or external links in a section so named. See Wikipedia:External links. There should be no links pointing to external sources until those in the 'References' section (with the exception of one optional link in any infobox).
Declined by Timtrent 2 months ago.All I see is three paragraphs of lists where there should be prose. Parts of this lists are culled directly from sources online. I chose not to consider them copyvios since they are, broadly, technical names. However, some could be reworded. I see WP:BOMBARD. Where I see that I see an editor trying too hard to convince me that the subject is notable. I see two true lists. "Mentioned in paragraph n" seems a common theme. Are these meant to be references? For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. 'nn under nn' lists are generally there to sell the media they are listed in, and rarely have a real world significance Lose Researchgate as a reference. It is not appropriate I am struggling to see how he passes WP:BIO. Perhaps if you cut the clutter and lose the Bombard, and write prose, not lists, we might be able to see whether he does. You have serious work to do. Please only resubmit it when you have done all you can. |
Submission declined on 29 June 2024 by Greenman (talk). This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. Declined by Greenman 2 months ago. |
Submission declined on 26 June 2024 by Ratnahastin (talk). This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies. Declined by Ratnahastin 2 months ago. |
Dr. Adedoyin Adeleke | |
---|---|
Born | Osogbo, Osun State. | July 7, 1989
Nationality | Nigerian |
Education | B.sc in Mechanical Engineering - Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife
M.sc in Energy Studies - University of Ibadan PhD in Energy and Nuclear Science and Technology (Energy for Sustainable Development) - Politecnico di Milano, Italy. |
Occupation(s) | Executive Director, Green Growth Africa (Renewable Energy Expert) |
Organization | Green Growth Africa |
Adedoyin Adeleke (Born July 7, 1989) is a Nigerian Green Growth (renewable energy) expert, a Mechanical Engineer and a Researcher[1]. He works with Green Growth Africa Sustainability Network (Green Growth Africa) - a non-governmental organization accredited by UNEP in September 2020 [2], formerly known as the International Support Network for African Development (ISNAD-Africa), which he founded in 2017. Co-author of the Progress Report on Climate Technology 2023[3]. He is a Member of Global Environmental Education Partnership (GEEP),[4] a Fellow, UNESCO Chair in Energy for Sustainable Development, Politecnico di Milano, Italy, and Fellow, BMUB International Short Course on Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency, Dresden, Germany.[5] Over the years, Adeleke has made substantial contributions to development across 22 African countries from Europe.[6]