Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Donegan


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:11, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Thomas Donegan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Struggling to find independent in-depth coverage in reliable sources - lack of WP:SIGCOV. Fails WP:NPOLITICIAN. Edwardx (talk) 23:44, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller!  (distænt write)  02:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller!  (distænt write)  02:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller!  (distænt write)  02:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. L3X1 Become a New Page Patroller!  (distænt write)  02:15, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete - Per nom; Fails all relevant notability requirements. - Hirolovesswords (talk) 03:05, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Being chair of a small town's board of selectmen is not an automatic WP:NPOL pass just because the person exists, but this doesn't state any reason why he could be considered more notable than most other selectmen or municipal councillors in most other towns, and isn't referenced anywhere near well enough to get him over WP:GNG in lieu. Bearcat (talk) 16:55, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Bare mention sources. One is election result, one passing mention and another profile from primariy source. No independent coverage and doesn't meet any point in WP:NPOL.–Ammarpad (talk) 14:23, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete An absurdly far failure to meet notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:24, 5 February 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.