Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Songs of an Irish Poet


 * 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 delete. Ad Orientem (talk) 01:16, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Songs of an Irish Poet

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable; part of an extended PR effort by the author and his publisher, creating Wikipedia pages for all of his books. – Broccoli &#38; Coffee (Oh hai) 19:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 13:22, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:29, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:17, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: You cant really merge and delete, so which is it?
 * Delete (and merge some of content)  - Promo, SPA, COI and sock behaviours aside, per the nominator I'm not seeing how the subject here meets WP:NBOOK. (The award "long listing" doesn't meet the expectation of "winning a major literary award". There's no indication it has been substantially re-used as reference or scholastic material elsewhere. Etc). The majority of the cited content here could be easily covered in the article on the biography's author (for example the stuff about the "long listing" and book launch), or in the article about the biography's subject (for example the stuff about posthumous recognition and the collection of her works). The book itself doesn't need its own article. (Nor, frankly, would it seem appropriate for someone to blanket create an article for all of any authors works in the manner seemingly at play here). Guliolopez (talk) 01:11, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 22:19, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Response. Hi . I'm not sure I understand. It is certainly not possible to "redirect and delete" (those are absolutely mutually exclusive things - agreed). But it is possible to "merge and delete". (Whether before the deletion or after the deletion [e.g. from archive] it is possible for anyone interested to copy/merge relevant content to the appropriate article. I am happy to do it before the deletion if required. Or after. Whichever. The content which seems "redeemable" to me is the stuff on the poet's works being archived - which is best dealt with in article on the poet. And the stuff about the biographer being shortlisted for an award - which is best dealt with in the article on the biographer.) If you feel this absolutely must be addressed before the AfD can be closed, then I can do it before. Otherwise delete away. Guliolopez (talk) 08:56, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * How were you planning to attribute the editors of the content you merge if the history is deleted? That's why we usually leave the history intact and put in a redirect. Spartaz Humbug! 15:38, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi. In honesty I'm not sure there's much to attribute. A paraphrasing of the small fragments "his book was nominated for an Irish Times award" and "her work was collected and archived at UCC" (in the Brian Brennan and Mary O'Leary articles respectively) would not seem to meet WP:NOATT. Neither fragment representing "sufficient creativity". And both fragments requiring a reword to "fit" in the respective articles anyway. Apologies if I gave the impression that there was a lot of content to move and attribute. My recommendation (primarily a "note to self" - which I have now struck-through if it makes life easier) was just that the same information could/should be imparted elsewhere. Guliolopez (talk) 16:18, 25 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete: fails WP:NBOOK & WP:PROMO. The page is part of a promotional walled garden, created around Brian Brennan (author) by an account that is probably himself: Special:Contributions/Brennanb4. No value to the project. K.e.coffman (talk) 00:57, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - very poorly sourced. Bearian (talk) 15:19, 29 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete a bit of a pile on at this point, but seems to be a promo page for a non-notable book. —  Insertcleverphrasehere (or here)  23:47, 30 June 2018 (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.