Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donal Blaney (2nd nomination)


 * 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   delete as failing WP:N. ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihonjoe 06:17, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Donal Blaney
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Hi - apologies if I've misunderstod but, I am proposing to ""delete"".


 * I nominated for deletion last week, but it was undone without discussion.
 * On rooting around, I see the consensus last time was to delete:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Donal_Blaney

This guy was a junior official in a political party ten years ago, then got investigated for racism. Definitively un-notable. Given the detail on the CV, it seems a fairly obvious vanity article. Who else would know when this guy was head of Southampton Young Tories?
 * Another editor did respond to my deletion proposal by supplying more references. Fair enough. But the central reason for my proposed deletion, however, is notability - not verifiability.

So, yeah -- Delete - oh, and looking at the previous log ""watch for sockpuppets"". Pistachiones(talk) 00:49, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * delete doesn't appear to be particularly notable and the artilce is definitely weirdly CVish. Speedy G4 if significantly the same as the previously deleted artilce. Jasynnash2 (talk) 09:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't Delete - isn't the point that he is currently founder and chairman of the Young Britons' Foundation, not what he did 10 years ago?

Thw fact that that isn't obvious suggests we still ""delete"". The Young Britons Foundation has a page -mention him as founder there. I'm quit surprised the Young Britons Foundation has a page - let alone its officers! This guy, bless 'im, clearly isn't wikinotable. Papyrus - and if you're listing him as a "Television" or "business" person, doubly so!
 * I'm not sure how that makes this an obvious delete. Can you discuss further? Mystache (talk) 23:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

[n.b. - edited because I forgot to log in...] Pistachiones (talk) 21:29, 24 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notability established by hague probe, Verifiability by guardian. Mystache (talk) 23:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

- "Just being an elected local official, or an unelected candidate for political office, does not guarantee notability, although such people can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." <-- he clearly fails on this test. - "Substantial coverage in reliable sources constitutes such objective evidence" <-- he clearly fails on this one, especially since this needs "more than just a short burst of news reports about a single event or topic". The Hague investigation - about which nothing was heard, and which happened nine years ago - does not qualify him.
 * I was being flippant before - but the criteria for politicans are:

Being chairman of an insignficant institution which he founded obviously does not justify wikinotability. It's a complete non-entity. Pistachiones (talk) 07:44, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Any other thoughts? We have two 'deletes' and one 'keep' thus far. I am, of course, biased, but I do think the argument for keeping doesn't hold water. Pistachiones (talk) 22:35, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Keep per notability found. Article does need major rewrite to fall in line with WP:BIO.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 03:30, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Delete. A google search does not indicate notability. all it does is show someone with his name exists, and one of them is the head of a non-notable organisation. no-one has contested that he is the head of YB, so what does the search prove? Being mentioned in articles about the organisation is not non-trivial coverage. there are specific guidelines indicating criteria of whether a politician is notable enough for an article, and he doesn't pass them.Yobmod (talk) 13:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  18:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  18:04, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 25 September 2008 (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.