Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Radharc Archive


 * 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. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:29, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

The Radharc Archive

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable organisation/project. WP:ORG and WP:GNG not met.

As part of a patrol of Category:Ireland articles needing attention, I came across this article. Which had been tagged for "immediate attention" since Feb 2016. I started to look for reliable secondary refs and coverage which could establish notability, and be used to expand the article beyond its current DICDEF format. I couldn't find any. In the newspapers of record in Ireland. Or elsewhere. Or print sources. Or otherwise.

In terms of the subject of the article ("Radharc Archive") a search in the main Irish newspapers returns a single/solitary result from the Irish Times. And zero/none from the Irish Independent.

Considering that perhaps we could move/rename the article to the charity organisation that oversees the archive ("Radharc Trust") I did an equivalent search. I found just 5 results in the Irish Times. And little more in the Irish Independent. None that could be used to establish notability and/or to expand the article beyond a single sentence.

While there are a few trivial/passing mentions of the subject in a few books (including in acknowledgement pages of books which have used the archive's services for research), these only establish that the subject exists. Not that it is notable.

Other than, perhaps this article in a 2015 edition of the History Ireland magazine or this from the Irish Film Institute, I can find little to no sources which cover the subject in its own right. Not to the extent that might be expected for SIGCOV and ORG. Guliolopez (talk) 12:28, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 12:31, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Guliolopez (talk) 12:31, 1 July 2020 (UTC)


 * COmment Just a quick search as I have not got time to look at this properly but the Irish Film Institute have this .Davidstewartharvey (talk) 14:47, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep I have now added refs and more detail to article which I think now shows enough for gng. Davidstewartharvey (talk) 17:14, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. Thanks for that . However, per my note above, those sources (and that content) don't directly related to the subject. The archive. The content (and the sources) largely relate to the original production company. And the charity that runs it. Not the archive itself. Of which there is very scant coverage/sources. Happy to see what consensus arises from this discussion. But, if the result is "keep", then we should consider whether the current title is the correct title for the retained content. Cheers. Guliolopez (talk) 18:02, 4 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep and rename to the production company with also information on the archive and charity as alltogether for those topics there is enough coverage for a standalone article in my view Atlantic306 (talk) 22:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per the improvements in RS. Consider Atlantic306 renaming suggestionLightburst (talk) 19:27, 9 July 2020 (UTC).
 * '''Comment*** I have no argument with renaming.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 07:57, 10 July 2020 (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.