Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pat O'Donnell: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
re
m delete
Line 19: Line 19:
*:'''Comment''' - No crystal balling, please. [[User:Snappy|Snappy]] ([[User talk:Snappy|talk]]) 10:02, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
*:'''Comment''' - No crystal balling, please. [[User:Snappy|Snappy]] ([[User talk:Snappy|talk]]) 10:02, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - completely non-notable. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<font color="Blue">'''Canterbury Tail'''</font>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|''<font color="Blue">talk</font>'']] 12:54, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' - completely non-notable. [[User:Canterbury Tail|<font color="Blue">'''Canterbury Tail'''</font>]] [[User talk:Canterbury Tail|''<font color="Blue">talk</font>'']] 12:54, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
*'''Delete''' per Canterbury Tail. --[[User:Kuzaar|Kuzaar]]<sup>-[[User talk:Kuzaar|T]]-[[Special:Contributions/Kuzaar|C]]-</sup> 12:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:30, 10 June 2009

Pat O'Donnell

Pat O'Donnell (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Page Created for soapboxing purposes GainLine 08:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete per nom, otherwise NN. JBsupreme (talk) 09:03, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, if its for "soapboxing" then I suggest WP:FIXIT not delete it. What is the rationale behind deletion, is it based on notability, unreliable sources etc? I remain unconvinced because I dont hear a reason to actually delete it.--Vintagekits (talk) 10:05, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've nominated this as per advice by mediator at Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2009-05-6/Corrib Gas. Ths article is being used to soapbox and is not notable GainLine 10:55, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete There is coverage in reliable sources but I think that this is only temporary notability and that this falls under WP:NOTNEWS. If there is anything that should be included it should be merged into Shell to Sea rather than being in a separate article. Smartse (talk) 10:44, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per nom, individual is not notable. Snappy (talk) 12:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:49, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]