Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kate Feeney


 * 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   no consensus. After three weeks and no real consensus, I think it's fair to say that one will not be reached in this discussion, as there is a fundamental disagreement over whether she meets WP:GNG, as she apparently (according to most discussion participants) meet WP:POLITICIAN.  Go  Phightins  !  12:47, 15 June 2014 (UTC)

Kate Feeney

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Feeney is a newly elected member of Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, As a local councillor she fails WP:Politician. The article creator seemed to think she was elected as as TD (Irish member of parliament), she was not. Her only other tenuous claim to fame is that she was the first female leader of the youth wing of Ireland's third largest political party. Snappy (talk) 12:58, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Snappy (talk) 13:01, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Snappy (talk) 13:03, 25 May 2014 (UTC)


 * According to this source, Kate Feeney was "at the centre of an awkward row which raised questions about Fianna Fáil's leadership". She has also been involved in "an internal fight" in her party, bringing headlines of "civil war". She has also been advised to "steer well clear" of her own party colleague, a former minister.
 * The nominator has also not taken into consideration the policy she uses in her argument. If she did she might find she was contradicting herself. Under this guideline, there is a place reserved on Wikipedia for 'Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage'. 'A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists.'
 * As well as this, 'elected local official[s] can still be notable if they meet the primary notability criterion of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject of the article".'
 * These issues should be taken into consideration when deciding the outcome of this discussion. There is also no evidence of the nominator's statement that the creator "seemed to think she was elected as as TD"


 * Keep, as declared above. --86.45.164.21 (talk) 16:03, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment - Nothing about the Mary Hanafin spat was notable, just internal part politics in a local electoral area of a county council and has generated some but not significant coverage. The creator of the article mentioned several times she had been elected as a TD for Dun Laoighaire Dail constituency and added TD categories to the article, simply look at earlier versions of the article to confirm this. Snappy (talk) 16:57, 25 May 2014 (UTC)


 * County councillors do not generally pass WP:POLITICIAN, and internal disagreements inside a political party don't necessarily confer notability on participants who weren't already notable enough for articles — if the fight had actually somehow toppled Fianna Fáil's leadership, there'd be a tidal wave of coverage of the leadership crisis, and it would thus be possible to write a much longer and more extensively sourced article about Kate Feeney than this. But if the best you can say is that it briefly threatened to topple the party leadership, then how do you demonstrably prove that a meaningful threat actually existed, and wasn't just an overblown media tempest about a "threat" that never really amounted to anything? Delete. Bearcat (talk) 00:13, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Tentative keep - significant press coverage warrants retention --Zymurgy (talk) 07:09, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, doesnt pass guideline for notability for a politican, @Zymurgy significant press coverage over a single issue doesnt confer notability, especailly one was repeated at election time. Murry1975 (talk) 17:19, 31 May 2014 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 19:09, 2 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. I can understand arguments above, both pro and con. I revamped the article, adding more references, removing unsourced material. My sense is Feeney is a prominent Irish politician. Her battle with Hanafin got widespread coverage so that the words Hanafin and Feeney are almost synonymous with "rival" or "Waterloo". Multiple independent reliable references suggest Feeney meets the general notability guideline.--Tomwsulcer (talk) 15:20, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete, at the moment, I think that Feeney is largely a case of WP:ONEEVENT; she had a bit of a spat with a fellow local politician but they have to sit next to each other awkwardly in council because their surnames are alphabetically close. There was a burst of coverage in reliable sources on the whole affair, but once her fifteen minutes were over it abated to nothing.  Lankiveil (speak to me) 03:15, 15 June 2014 (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.