Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antoine MacGiolla Bhrighde

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 no consenus to delete. W.marsh 15:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Antoine MacGiolla Bhrighde

ATTENTION! If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether a page or group of pages is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Note: Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username|UTC timestamp [optional]}}

Antoine MacGiolla Bhrighde (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Fails WP:BIO- non notable IRA terrorist- no references and no evidence of having done anything Astrotrain 21:28, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Strong Keep This was any amazing man, born in Derry, moved to Belfast where his house was bombed and his father and brother shot by loyalist. Then commended for bravery by the Irish Army before joining the PIRA, involved in many missions and killed by the British Army. Granted more detail needs to be added but that only comes with time.--Vintagekits 22:29, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Again you are using unreliable sources, or citing sources that cannot be verified. The Troops Out Movement is not a reliable source for example. Other users may wish to read Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerard Montgomery where Vintagekits is citing a Daily Mail article that doesn't even exist in their archives. Astrotrain 22:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment, Actually the source was proven correct, the article was in its subscription service, and also obviously could have been read if you bought the paper on the days that the information was printed in them, or went to look at their arcives--Vintagekits 16:10, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

*Comment - not just one source there mate - what about CAIN and The Guardian - ever heard of them!?!--Vintagekits 23:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, no notability asserted. --Dhartung | Talk 23:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable Weggie 23:44, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. I have now added a lot more detail and references to the article. Please see here to compare old the version and the time the AfD and the current contribution. regards--Vintagekits 16:06, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep. The manner of his death and his ther accomplishments together make him notable. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 23:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Under the condition that the POV in the article is removed, and the content is narrowed down to what the references cover. Some of the references quoted don't even mention him. Stu ^{’Bout ye!} 09:08, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment, Stu, in the other articles he is possibly refered to by his English name which I have also listed, please note that his English name is stated in different location as being any comination of Tony or Anthony and McBride and MacBride. regards--Vintagekits 08:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete not notable. I would also point out that how "strong" you might feel about your vote doesn't make it worth more than my regular old delete. Soltak | Talk 22:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. This isnt a vote, its a discussion, and strong/weak are ways of expressing emotion. play on. John Vandenberg 15:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 15:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 15:56, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep - As much as I hate to agree with Vintagekits, MacGiolla Bhrighde probably deserves to be kept given the particular circumstances; however these debates have to be on an individual basis only. Vintagekits must also realize that lavishing praise on terrorists is a sure way to get his edits reviewed for POV.El chulito 02:50, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - Not noteable. - Kittybrewster 17:40, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete unless it is Wikipedia's intention to carry a biography of every dedicated murderer of innocent civilians who ever existed. David Lauder 13:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. This article seems to be part of an ongoing attempt to memorialise every dead IRA militant on Wikipedia, padded with dubious sources and an undercurrent of anglophobia.--Major Bonkers 15:37, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete as per the above comments.--Couter-revolutionary 19:26, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment, Admin, please see here and here for details on the canvassing campaign in breach of WP:CANVAS that a number of the editors who have voted delete have been engaged in.--Vintagekits 19:35, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Comment, Much of the arguments for deletion above boils down to to POV and WP:IDONTLIKEIT as we know that is not a reason to delete. There is numerous nontrivial secondary source coverage here, and any perceived NPOV problems can be sorted through WP:SOFIXIT. My reasoning for the 'keep vote are factual.

1. A nationalist moving into a loyalist area and where there family house was repeated attacks and he and his father were shoot (his father eventually dieing from his injuries (notable)
2. Joining the regular Irish Army and at the same time secretly joking the IRA, highly unusual, controversial and therefore notable,
3. Caught smuggling arms from the Republic of Ireland to Northern Ireland and subsequently being imprisoned for this (notable)
4. PIRA membership is pretty notable on its own but MacGiolla Bhrighde was aligned with the militant South Derry and the East Tyrone Brigades who favoured a more radical approach that the IRA Army Council.(notable)
5. Shot by the SAS in highly disputed circumstances with republicans claiming he was executed after being detained and British forces claiming that he was shot after lunging for a British Army soldiers gun.(notable)
6. Debate of the location of his memorial stone, may not very notable but interesting nonetheless.
7. He is refernced in some of the most well known books on the modern days troubles including those by Andy McNab, Tim Pat Coogan and Ed Moloney.(notable)

Finally please compare the version when the article was first nominated and the current version.--Vintagekits 20:36, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, this one is obvious. Numerous independent sources attest the notability of the topic under WP:BIO. —ptk✰fgs 23:20, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. All of the citations are from non-reliable sources, while google books and google news return nothing. Addhoc 23:21, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, Notable figure in the Irish conflict who played a key role in the IRA's armed campaign. Tiocfaidh Ár Lá! 23:59, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• Keep, Whether you agree or disagree with the man's politics, his life was an extraordinary one and the information contained on this entry informs the general knowledge and understanding of the Irish conflict. I am interested in all of the extraordinary people on all sides of this conflict whose history and the political choices the made and actions they took can contribute to the general understanding of the war in Ireland.Free Speech

Comment:the IRA were a proscribed and illegal organisation throughout all of Ireland. There was no "war" in Ireland, just a terrorist campaign by an illegal group of monsters responsible for the deaths of innocents. Glorification of these people in pages on Wikipedia should be discouraged entirely. That is not what encyclopaedias are for. David Lauder 10:11, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment - firstly "Free Speech" is an IP and the above 'vote' his/her first contribution. Secondly, this isn't about whether he was "extraordinary" or a "monster". The sources provided so far are not reliable and the subject does not appear to be verifiable based on internet searches. Addhoc 10:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment - internet searches alone do not tell the whole story with regards this situation, 1. When he was killed in was before the "internet explosion" - if it were today then there wold be a multitude of internet based sources, if you were to access the hard copy archives of Irish and NI paper you would be able to see the reports. 2. He is written about in a number of the leading books relating to Northern Irish troubles and they have been referenced. 3. which sources listed do you not consider to be reliable and what statements from them are you questioning? If you can clearly list and point your argument then we should be able to discuss them sensibly. regards--Vintagekits 11:08, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment thanks for your calm and thoughtful reply. Completely agree that internet searches don't always tell the whole story. For the avoidance of doubt, when the nom indicates "no references" that implies none of the citations provided are considered satisfactory. Could you provide extracts from the books that mention him? Addhoc 11:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Comment,Addhoc, no problem, please see the nominators history of nominations to gauge his POV, I dont have time right now to type out verbaitum the extracts for the books but I will try - they are very well known books with regards this subject, the McNab one being very popular as it was the follow up to his "Brave Two Zero" book with the Moloney and Coogan books being more recognised within the academic world for their insite into the working of the IRA and its history. I'll see what I can do.--Vintagekits 12:18, 1 February 2007 (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.