Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dan Kennedy (1900s hurler)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. (non-admin closure) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 10:00, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Dan Kennedy (1900s hurler)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable. Only 1 line. No sources. Laurel Lodged (talk) 20:16, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 20:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)
 * He played for an extended period at senior level. His notability is not a consequence of the quality of the article. RashersTierney (talk) 17:46, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * If the quality of the article is not up to supporting his supposed career, then he remains not notable. If anybody can be bothered improving the article quality, to notable levels (with citations) I would not object to it being revisited. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:43, 9 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep: Subject has played at senior inter-county level and won multiple All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship medals. Article meets Athlete guidelines. - Teester (talk) 11:18, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Prove it Maybe all this good stuff is true, but there's not an iota of proof anywhere in the article to back it up. Not 1 citation or wikilink even. Laurel Lodged (talk) 12:42, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I added one ref the other day. Perhaps time would be better spent adding more and improving the article rather than just arguing here. RashersTierney (talk)
 * A better use of time would be to construct a nice wee table listing Dan and all the other greats per team, per year. That ould be notable. This is just a waste of bytes. Laurel Lodged (talk) 19:29, 11 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce  ( talk  &#124;  contribs ) 02:30, 15 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep A stub about a notable athlete of 100 years ago. Such stubs are useful, can be expanded as time goes by, and are not "just a waste of bytes" as the nominator unpersuasively argues. Instead, this is useful encyclopedic content.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  09:12, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Article improved and ref'd to show notability since the AfD nomination.  Lugnuts  (talk) 10:18, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.