Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patricia Madigan


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) ‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ LibStar (talk) 00:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Patricia Madigan

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR. A search in google news and books and Australian search engine trove for the names "Patricia Madigan" or "Trish Madigan" did not yield indepth results. 3 of the 6 sources are primary LibStar (talk) 04:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Religion,  and Australia. LibStar (talk) 04:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  05:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep Patricia Madigan is a well known leader of women in the Catholic church. She is an author and represented catholic women on national and international ecumenical bodies. This article should be kept and time allowed for the Australian Women n Religion group to improve the article and show notability. LPascal (talk) 02:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "well known leader of women in the Catholic church" is not a criterion for notability. Please read WP:BIO and WP:AUTHOR. LibStar (talk) 02:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: I have revised the article and shown she is notable as she is "has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in a specific field", she has "received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject", and as an academic "The person's research has had a significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources."; as an author "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" (her books were often reviewed). I suggest you and other editors re-read the revised article and see she has a national and international reputation and is notable in her field of interfaith dialogue and feminist theology. LPascal (talk) 07:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * You cannot vote twice. LibStar (talk) 08:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I didn't realise I was voting, I thought I was just replying to you. However I would like to replace my first "KeeP with my second one. Can I go into edit sources and delete the first keep and replace it with the second Keep reasons? LPascal (talk) 08:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * You can strike out your original vote. LibStar (talk) 08:37, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep relevant material found in Trove is sufficient to clarify that publications are both reviewed, and in sufficient depth. JarrahTree 11:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article has been expanded significantly and references added, including reviews of her work, since this nomination was made.--Oronsay (talk) 00:02, 5 March 2024 (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.