Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tom McNamara

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. - Glen 15:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tom McNamara

Subject is nn. In addition, the article alleges without viewable citations that the person was a child molester and violates WP:WEASEL while doing so ("While in Mountshannon it is believed McNamara sexually abused Brendan O'Donnell...") If the subject was alive, this article would be a libel suit waiting to happen. Aaron 00:05, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom.UberCryxic 00:15, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Brendan O'Donnell seems to be notable, but not McNamara. The accusations are a little tough to believe, at least. Not quite up to our verifiability standards. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 00:22, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Merge as said above, Brendan O'Donnell seems to be the important name here, since the book was about him, but the information in this article might also belong in Roman Catholic sex abuse cases, at least as a bit in the Literature section given the book about it. Mister.Manticore 00:33, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Danny Lilithborne 04:48, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom reasons. -- Dcflyer 06:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:V Michael Billington (talk • contribs) 07:54, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete CSD A6 --Roninbk _{t c #} 08:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete though I would probably 2nd that speedy. In it's previous state, it was nothing more then an attack page. After the unsourced negative comments were removed, it doesn't assert any real notability. 205.157.110.11 10:26, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete fails WP:BIO, and we don't need articles set up as attack pages.-- danntm ^T _C 19:14, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete fails WP:V and WP:BIO. As said above, should probably just be noted on Roman Catholic sex abuse cases, scince the article is so short.--KojiDude ^{(viva la BAM!)} 21:30, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete —Khoikhoi 03:15, 21 September 2006 (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.