Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Kelly (Irish journalist)


 * 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 speedy delete. WP:CSD G4: the article is not significantly different from the previously deleted article Michael Kelly (journalist). —David Eppstein 16:43, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Michael Kelly (Irish journalist)

 * - (View AfD) (View log)

to save from vandalism should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siptu (talk • contribs) 2007/08/30 18:18:50
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 11:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Comment This shouldn't be on AfD (for the reason given). Nick mallory 13:58, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep as the nomination is invalid as can be. If the only problem with this article is that it can be vandalised, it should be protected, not deleted. 96T 13:16, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep per 96T. User: (talk • contribs • count) 13:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as article fails to demonstrate notability per WP:BIO. Links to own articles and radio appearances do not qualify as independent evidience of notability. --Gavin Collins 14:24, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: It should be noted that the AFD originator is also the subject of the article/originator. He deleted a sourced edit (albeit from a blog) from another person that showed evidence of plagiarism. But...as you note...his lack of notability has already been estabilished in another AFD discussion. - Smashville 15:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. Considering the page shows no evidence of being vandalized in the past and considering that "potential for vandalism" is not a reason for closing an article (see: Michael Vick), this is not a valid reason for deletion. Smashville 15:18, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete as db-repost after discovering previous AfD. Slightly changed title, still not notable. Smashville 20:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Clear Delete as a recreation of an already deleted article that does not introduce any additional material asserting notability. IN instances like this, one doesn't really need to go through AfD, just ask an admin to delete and protect the page. Eusebeus 19:41, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete It is a Recreated Article. Djmckee1  -  Talk - Sign  20:37, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete This is nothing but a vanity page which was previously deleted. It is for reasons of vanity that the originator and subject of this article is requesting to delete the article, and my gut instinct wants to deny him his vain request, but the Wikipedia guidelines demand that there be no article about this non-notable newspaper employee.  The only interesting part of the whole article was the information offered from the crazy protestant blog, but the blog was a highly unreliable original source.  And just because that little interchange was interesting and entertaining does not make it in any way NOTABLE.OfficeGirl 03:56, 1 September 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.