Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Irish-American mobsters


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 09:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

List of Irish-American mobsters

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

unreferences listcruft delete Cornell Rockey 01:53, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

As the nominator, I'm completely open to nominating all these pages. I singled out an example, knowing there was a larger problem here. All these lists are indiscriminate, unsourced and partial > all of which are bad for an encyclopedia. Cornell Rockey 05:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Nomination reason is rather poor, list of mobsters is useful because you can't go dirrectly to any if you don't know there names. There are many articles like this, don't think nominator even knows this: List of godfathers, List of Italian-American mobsters, List of Irish-American mobsters, List of Jewish-American mobsters, List of British mobsters. Needs strategy worked out before we just delete them all.--155.144.251.120 03:03, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree that to single out the Irish for deletion is prejudicial. There should be an overall soultution, but there should be referencing at all of the mobster pages.  --Kevin Murray 04:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Personally, I feel the lists are helpful especially to those editors involved in organized crime related articles. There are both pros and cons to lists vs. categories and I believe a reader or editor should be allowed the right to an alternative. However, among the various organized crime related lists (see 1) and categories (see 1/2) proposed for deletion, this specific list has previously been nominated and kept. If you feel the main issue is a lack of references, then a reference tag should be placed rather then then nominating it for deletion. MadMax 05:23, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article is manifestly useful, it just needs somewhat better referencing. -Toptomcat 13:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia is WP:NOT a list. Also, who decides how to use the pejorative term "mobster"?  How could this article ever be anything more than original research?  Prejudicial and unreferenced, no matter how useful one may find it -- usefulness doesn't warrant inclusion.  As with most lists, maybe this could work as a category (but I doubt it).  /Blaxthos 18:13, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * So you have a general objection to all lists, ever? -Toptomcat 18:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep references could easily be provided, there are books on the subject.  So, I don't see that as an especially large problem.  Get back to me if you can articulate a better objection.  Cruft is not one o them.  FrozenPurpleCube 19:05, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, list with a good scope, offers additional information beyond a mere list. I reject the arguments of the nomination. Unreferenced is not a reason for deletion, it is a reason for tagging. --Dhartung | Talk 20:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per all above of course Jcuk 21:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP is not a list. This is covered all over the place.  Philippe Beaudette 23:32, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per, for example, FrozenPurpleCube. Note WP:LIST; there are good reasons to have lists in Wikipedia, and this list either fulfills these reasons, or has strong potential to, after some cleanup and better annotation/different sorting, fulfill them. schi talk  23:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Dhartung. ShivaDaDestroyer 00:56, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Unreferenced, indiscriminate list biased with regard to ethnicity. What's the point to this list? With no references, who decides what names get added here? Further, it shouldn't be in article space at all. At best, this would be a WikiProject. -- Kesh 03:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I think the list is hardly indiscriminate. Certainly prominant mobsters such as Dion O'Banion, Vincent Coll, Danny Greene, Whitey Bulger, etc. are clearly organized crime figures. Granted the article may need additional references although it dosen't seem that should be such a serious issue that it should be considered for deletion. MadMax 18:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)


 * The problem is, who gets defined as a mobster? More importantly, why does being Irish matter? Though probably not the author's intention, associating the two smacks of an ethnic attack. And there's no mention of Irish heritage in some of the articles listed, so why are they included? -- Kesh 20:13, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If you'll notice the examples I provided, with exception to the North Side Gang which did include some Polish and German-Americans within its ranks, these mobsters headed or were members of criminal organizations which were predominanly made up of Irish-Americans such as the Westies, Egan's Rats, Winter Hill Gang and others. Organized crime is generally grouped by ethicity no different from Italian and Jewish-American organized crime, each of which have their own lists, and this list includes members of Irish-American organized crime no different then any of the other lists. Also all of the entries are categorized under Irish-American mobsters, regardless if their ethicity is mentioned in the article. MadMax 01:42, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * If their ethnicity is not described in the article, how do we know they're Irish? It's this level of unverifiability that makes me vote to delete. There's nothing showing that the list is accurate, much less encyclopedic. -- Kesh 02:05, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The references I have provided, specifically T.J. English's Paddy Whacked: The Untold Story of the Irish American Gangster and Stephen Fox's Blood and Power: Organized Crime in Twentieth-Century America, clearly descibe all of these individuals involved in Irish-American organized crime. I can provide individual citations on each individual mobster if nessessary, although in my opinion I believe it is exessive and unessessary. MadMax 02:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Dhartung  S h a r k f a c e  2 1 7  02:56, 23 January 2007 (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.