Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Monica Leech


 * 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. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Monica Leech

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article is not a biography but concerns only a single event in this person's otherwise non-notable life that received a small amount of press coverage. CIreland 08:26, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete The problem is all we'll ever know is this incident, which is unfavorable.. think we have an issue of do no harm here.. see WP:BLP1E --Spazure 09:45, July 15, 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree with the comments above. "Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid..." may also apply here. --Malcolmxl5 09:06, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The case appears to have had some political significance in Ireland. This article would have to be rewritten to be about the case itself, though, and less about the incident or about Leech. --Dhartung | Talk 09:08, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Response If a new article were written about the case itself instead of the person, would it not be a completely new article, not one named "Monica Leech" ? Spazure 09:13, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. Essentially, this case concerned a vulgar jibe made by a caller to a radio phone-in programme at this woman's expense, who was perceived as receiving excessive remuneration for work carried out for an Irish politician. The jibe was reported in a newspaper, she sued the paper for libel and lost. It would appear that there were no political repercussion, e.g. no resignations. It seems to me that the event and case are of only temporary interest and do not hold any long-term notability to warrant a new article. --Malcolmxl5 09:35, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The point is not the vulgar jibe which was of prurient interest to the public, it was the ruling's importance in terms of Irish libel case law, which was much discussed in the media (and will probably be adjudicated by the Irish Supreme Court, as she plans to appeal). There are also potential repercussions with regard to Irish compliance with EU directives. Not all "political repercussions" involve people's careers. Spazure, the point is getting to a compliant article, either through rewrite or from scratch is immaterial. Renames are minor, not really an obstacle. --Dhartung | Talk 19:14, 15 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 10:57, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment The article doesn't seem to make any point about the importance to libel law in Ireland. It just discusses that the case was filed and decided in the newspaper's favor.  As it is, the article is nothing more than the tale of an offended person suing a newspaper and losing.   If it can be demonstrated that there was something legally significant, Monica Leech would probably pass notability as the instigator of the case.Montco 20:10, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete The article must be blanked and/or speedily deleted as a clear violation of WP:BLP because it contains derogatory statements about a living individual which are clearly libelous and completely unreferenced. If it were referenced, then it could be deleted as a violation of WP:BLP1E since it refers to one embarrasing incident in her otherwise non-notable life. I have removed all text except "Monica Leech is a self-employed communications consultant, who runs her own company." which, while unsourced, is at least not libellous. This action was performed as a member of Living People Patrol. Edison 20:24, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per nom and Edison. If the underlying event is mentioned in an article related to her previous employer, she might merit brief mention there if there are sources to support it, but otherwise, she should not have a biography. - Crockspot 21:11, 15 July 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.