Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Treaty Sarsfields GAA


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Nathan Johnson (talk) 01:25, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Treaty Sarsfields GAA

 * – ( View AfD View log )

unreferenced OR essay. copy of Template:Infobox_GAA_club which makes no sense and should also probably be deleted Gaijin42 (talk) 16:56, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Speedy as nonsense. I find it hard to believe this is anything but. Dennis Brown (talk) 16:58, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I withdraw my speedy/delete !vote based upon the fact that the current article is substantially different than the article was when it was nominated, ie: it is readable and appears to be about a completely different subject matter (although this may be simply due to it being readable). Since I'm not familiar enough with the new (?) subject matter, I would be neutral about it.  It still needs work, but I can see why someone would possibly think this is notable enough to keep.  Dennis Brown (talk) 14:27, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:15, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge/Redirect to Limerick GAA - After learning more about the Gaelic Athletic Association than I thought I would ever learn, I believe this article is essentially a sourced essay about the history Limerick GAA. There may be plenty of useful information but at this point, it's written very colloquially.  I'll invite a few Wikiprojects to take a look and see if there's content that can be salvaged but as it stands, the article incomprehensible able to me and probably the vast majority of English readers.  Ol Yeller21  Talktome  21:59, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Perhaps it is written as a very confusing Limerick, for a meta joke :) Gaijin42 (talk) 22:00, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi, i have made quite a few changes. I have taken out any personal opinions and every bit of history re the Treaty Sarsfields GAA is referenced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iverus (talk • contribs) 14:19, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I would take that as a keep !vote from you then. Good job cleaning it up.  Dennis Brown (talk) 14:27, 2 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep, article is not about Limerick GAA but about a specific GAA club in Limerick. Notability guidelines for sport mainly cover persons and are not helpful for clubs, but I would suggest that any club that has won county championships could be considered notable. The secondary sources provided in the article are probably in themselves evidence that the club meets the general notability requirements. In addition, this editor found the latest version a more interesting and enjoyable read than many articles about weightier topics! ComhairleContaeThirnanOg (talk) 20:41, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Just for fun, go back and read the original version that was nominated ;) Dennis Brown (talk) 20:44, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep First reason: a clearly notable club. Second reason: a nomination after just eleven minutes, so denying the author to finish the article. Third reason: Please do not bite the newcomers. Night of the Big Wind  talk  21:23, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
 * You may want WP:DANNO for that. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:15, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Och, I dare to confess that I had my collision too with the Flying Spaghetti Monster  Night of the Big Wind  talk  21:55, 8 November 2011 (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.