Jump to content

Talk:Aliko Dangote

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is Aliko Dangote the owner of Nigeria as seen on Google Search??

[edit]

Seeing that Google has named Dangote, the owner of Nigeria is Alarming. Even if he is the richest black man in the world and contributed to the economy and wealth of the country doesn't make him the owner. 102.91.5.162 (talk) 11:48, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, this is Wikipedia. We have nothing to do with Google; you want want to contact them directly if there is a problem with their search engine. I don't see the same problem in the article here. Thanks. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Osvaldo12 Controversy

[edit]

Is this worth addressing? 86.190.58.61 (talk) 21:41, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's certainly very notable. 2001:8003:6C03:A00:819B:6A3D:A15B:9C0A (talk) 16:14, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That other reply was from me, by the way. I just wasn't logged in but now I am. Finn Bolton (talk) 16:21, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
See WP:CSECTION for the answer. See also WP:BLP. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:41, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

[edit]

Dangote in 2014
Dangote in 2014
5x expanded by SafariScribe (talk). Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has fewer than 5 past nominations.

Safari ScribeEdits! Talk! 05:58, 28 January 2025 (UTC).[reply]

  • This is an engaging biographical piece. The article is free from any copyright issues, and all sections are properly referenced. The hook is included, and the source aligns with the details provided in the nomination. Image properly licensed including the ones featured in the article. Everything appears to be in order. Good to go. Toadboy123 (talk) 12:39, 28 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@SafariScribe and Toadboy123: There is one citation tag in the article that needs to be resolved before the article can be featured on the main page. Cielquiparle (talk) 06:59, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cielquiparle DoneSafari ScribeEdits! Talk! 08:32, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SafariScribe and Toadboy123: We need a different hook. The "first" hooks are generally frowned upon at DYK and come under extra scrutiny and could easily be taken down mid-way through their run on the main page if they are contested (if they even make it that far in the process). In this case it's not too hard to find another Nigerian who is often called the first black billionaire in Africa, namely Louis Odumegwu Ojukwu. See for example this Forbes Africa article; there are many other articles that say similar. Cielquiparle (talk) 11:34, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. @SafariScribe: Not according to List of Africans by net worth. (You forgot to sign your new proposed hook.) Cielquiparle (talk) 05:28, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Still needs a new hook, or some work to prove that the claim in ALT1 above is true. Cielquiparle (talk) 22:08, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ALT1 is contradicted by this BBC article: SA billionaire overtakes Dangote as Africa’s richest man Rjjiii (talk) 00:46, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relabeled as ALT2 so there is no confusion. Struck ALT1 per above discussion. @SafariScribe: ALT2 is going in a promising direction – it could be great, even, as it touches on one of Dangote's most important accomplishments. But there are a couple of problems to resolve: 1) The hook doesn't say what kind of refinery it is...so on that grounds alone it should be rejected. You need to make it more specific: What kind of refinery did you mean? Dangote himself owns several types of refineries, including the largest sugar refinery in sub-Saharan Africa. 2) The article needs to explain more about Dangote's role in building the oil refinery. There are many reliable sources about his role and his vision and why the refinery is important to the Nigerian economy. Right now the article is making it sound like he just happened to become the owner. No, without Dangote himself we would not have Africa's largest oil refinery in the first place. Do a bit more reading on this and explain it better in the article, even if it's just a few sentences, and cite additional sources to do it justice; you can do it while remaining completely factual and not promotional. Cielquiparle (talk) 07:56, 16 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

contributions) 12:12, 24 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding controversies

[edit]

This page is not WP:NPOV. There is a myriad of controversies surrounding this subject and for the page to give a reasonable overview of this subject the controversies must be included.

I am going to add the controversies.Postit note warrior (talk) 17:41, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do not remove cited relevant content without a good reason. ... discospinster talk 17:47, 18 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]