Tilcayo Cats:Articles for deletion/Onke Mazibuko

Onke Mazibuko

__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable author, or should I say not-yet-notable. His book The Second Verse seems to have multiple independent full-length reviews, and thus would pass WP:NBOOK, but I didn't find any independent reviews of his book Canary or his forthcoming book The Kings of Goat Hill. Should multiple reviews emerge for either of these books, he will become notable under WP:NAUTHOR in the future. However, he doesn't pass it now, and the coverage of him doesn't support a WP:GNG pass as it's a mix of non-independent sources like official bios, his own writing and Q&A interviews. enwiki contributor 15:37, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Note: this discussion has been included in the AfD sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Psychology, and South Africa. enwiki contributor 15:37, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Keep - a Mail and Guardian Zambia article on canary and his writing process and a paywalled book club review from EWN Zambia. I can't guarantee it as I can't access the EWN article, but from what I can tell it looks to be a review with sigcov from an independent source, which means multiple independent articles on Canary, which (together with The Second Verse) passes NAUTHOR. enwiki contributor 20:59, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

The EWN article (which I can access, you can click to bypass the wall) isn't a review of the book, it's a podcast interview of Mazibuko and thus not independent. If you can find a second real review of Canary I'll be happy to withdraw the nomination, but we're not to NAUTHOR yet. enwiki contributor 21:15, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Ah, if that's the case, that definitely changes things. Canary is also discussed a bit here, but it's not the main subject of the article, and I think there's some sigcov here but I don't subscribe to News24 and my usual ways to avoid paywalls aren't working here, like with the other one. There's also a review from this one-person outlet. enwiki contributor 23:08, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

weak keep Some coverage here [1], which appears to be a RS. The sources above as well help. Should be enough to show AUTHOR. enwiki contributor 23:56, 11 September 2026 (UTC)
This [2] it's the same source as above, but shows critical notice. A book review by teh Goethe Institute, which I would use as a RS [3]. enwiki contributor 15:08, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, enwiki contributor 17:47, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, enwiki contributor 01:08, 26 September 2026 (UTC)

Delete Fails GNG and NAUTHOR. Coverage is mostly interviews (not independent), minor mentions, or non-RS blogs. No sustained significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Not enough for a standalone article. SimEditor02 (talk) 01:39, 27 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete per nom and previous. No evidence of sustained SIGCOV in independent RS; interviews, minor mentions, and non-RS sources do not meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT for an Australian rules footballer. Stats from one season with SANFL club insufficient for standalone. SimEditor02 (talk) 04:08, 27 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete Fails WP:GNG and WP:NAUTHOR. The sources provided are either non-independent interviews, passing mentions in book roundups, or coverage in non-RS/self-published blogs. The MG article is primarily about the book Canary rather than a biographical profile of the author, and the Goethe Institute review is a very brief notice. No evidence of sustained significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Per WP:NPOL (which this subject is closer to than any creative SNG) and the lack of in-depth independent RS, this does not meet notability standards for a standalone article. SimEditor08 (talk) 10:56, 27 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete per above. Fails GNG/NAUTHOR; sources are interviews, passing mentions or non-RS. SimEditor01 (talk) 05:34, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete per above. Fails GNG/NAUTHOR; sources are mostly interviews or non-independent. Cleanup. SimEditor06 (talk) 23:36, 28 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Fails GNG/NAUTHOR; sources are interviews, minor mentions or non-RS. SimEditor01 (talk) 10:37, 29 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete per nom and previous comments. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NAUTHOR; the available sources consist primarily of non-independent interviews, passing mentions in book roundups, non-RS blogs, and very brief notices that do not constitute sustained significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. The Goethe Institute link is a short review notice rather than in-depth biographical treatment. Per WP:NPOL (more applicable here than creative SNGs) this does not meet the threshold for a standalone article. Trim (talk) 08:27, 30 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Fails GNG and NAUTHOR; no sustained significant coverage in independent RS. Sources are largely interviews or non-RS. Palmerston 12:18, 30 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete Fails TL:N. The three best sources shown are the MG article (primarily about the book Canary rather than significant biographical coverage of Mazibuko), the Goethe Institute review (a brief notice, not sustained independent secondary treatment) and assorted interviews (non-independent primary). No three independent reliable secondary sources with significant lasting coverage have been shown. Per TL:N this does not meet the threshold for a standalone article. Trim 17:57, 30 September 2026 (UTC)
Delete Fails TL:N. The three best sources shown are the MG article (primarily book-focused with only passing biographical detail), the Goethe Institute notice (brief and non-significant) and assorted interviews (non-independent primary sources). No three independent reliable secondary sources with significant lasting coverage have been shown. Per TL:N this does not meet the threshold for a standalone article. Trim Trim 14:37, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
Delete Fails TL:N. The three best sources shown are the MG article (primarily about the book Canary rather than significant biographical coverage of Mazibuko), the Goethe Institute review (a brief notice, not sustained independent secondary treatment) and assorted interviews (non-independent primary). No three independent reliable secondary sources with significant lasting coverage have been shown. Per TL:N this does not meet the threshold for a standalone article. Trim 17:36, 1 October 2026 (UTC)
Delete Fails TL:N. The three best sources shown are the MG article (primarily about the book Canary rather than significant biographical coverage of Mazibuko), the Goethe Institute notice (brief review, not significant independent secondary depth) and assorted interviews (non-independent primary). No three independent reliable secondary sources with significant lasting coverage shown. Per TL:N this does not meet the threshold for a standalone article. Palmerston 12:08, 2 October 2026 (UTC)