Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Irish Republic


 * 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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Withdrawn, I have changed my mind after reading the Keep votes. (non-admin closure) 🌶️Jalapeño🌶️ Don't click this link! 10:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC)

The Irish Republic

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

No indication of notability for this book. This can ideally be moved to Irish Republic, since the vast majority of people typing in The Irish Republic are looking for the country, not the book. 🌶️Jalapeño🌶️ Don't click this link! 15:25, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, History,  and Ireland. 🌶️Jalapeño🌶️ Don't click this link! 15:25, 5 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep although partisan, it is an important book in documenting modern Irish history. In A “Manly Study”? Irish Women Historians, 1868–1949 (2006), Springer Verlag, author Nadia C. Smith states: "The Irish Republic, one of the most popular Irish histories ever written, made Dorothy Macardle one of the most famous and influential Irish historians of her generation." See, in particular:  and  See also throughout the volumes  and, as well as   There are numerous reviews of The Irish Republic including  Additional reviews were published in 1937 & 1938, but I do not have access to those papers, for example, to The Times.  --Bejnar (talk) 16:39, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. My own WP:BEFORE identified the same sources (which cover the subject in some depth and as an independent topic) as are noted by above. I had added some of them to the article before coming to contribute to this discussion. To my mind, the volume of coverage of the book (its influence, relevance, neutrality, etc), seems to stand separate from coverage of the book's author, her life, etc. And so I would argue that the title should be retained. (If consensus is that the book doesn't independently meet GNG or SIGCOV, then - at the very least - the title should be retained as a redirect. Certainly outright deletion doesn't seem appropriate at all at all...) Guliolopez (talk) 17:00, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets the relevant standard. Moreover, it's already long enough (and judging by the O'Halpin source, expandable enough) that merging into the article on the author would be awkward. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 21:34, 5 August 2023 (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.