Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

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 --JForget 23:43, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Pádraig Mac Lochlainn

Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Procedural nom. This article has been PRODed three times now, so I felt it was probably a good idea to bring it here and see if we can get a consensus since the PROD was removed without explanation the first time and two other people since have felt it should be deleted. The reason for the last PROD read "unreferenced stub article on non-notable local politician and unsuccessful general election candidate." As this is a procedural nom, I am neutral at this time. Redfarmer (talk) 10:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• Comment I tried to discern some idea of notability, but I think we really need a person who knows the struture of Irish politics to step into this one. I can't tell what level of government he is in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Autocracy (talk • contribs) 11:08, 24 March 2008
• Delete. The guidelines are clear on this, councillors are non notable as are candidates to a legislature. If they are elected they then meet the criteria and become notable. As this person failed in their election bid in 2007 they are non notable. - Galloglass 11:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. and WP:BIO#Politicians. JohnCD (talk) 11:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per JohnCD unsuccessful election candidate who is not a member of a regional legislature. Valenciano (talk) 12:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I would say delete, but I'm not sure what level of government a "Councillor" sits on. Can you confirm it's sub-regional? Also, he succeeded in 2004. --Auto ^{(talk / contribs)} 13:04, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

He is a member of Donegal County Council, which runs some local services in County Donegal. Irish county councils have limited powers (they do roads, refuse, parks, development planning, libraries etc but not schools, health, or national roads) and they have almost no revenue-raising powers. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

PS To answer the question directly, yes it is sub-regional. Regions in Ireland are inconsistent defined, but for most purposes in the Republic of Ireland Donegal would be part of a North-West or Connacht/Ulster region, including at least County Donegal, County Sligo, County Leitrim. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:16, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. It was me who added the latest PROD, with the reason "unreferenced stub article on non-notable local politician and unsuccessful general election candidate", which still sums up my view. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:12, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. The history is interesting revealing that the same editor Padraig removed the first prod tag without a reason, and when the prod was reinserted, he removed it again saying it could not be prodded a second time! Hopefully there is no connection between the user and the article's subject; that would be WP:COI. ww2censor (talk) 14:28, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• Comment No I have no connection with the subject, I removed the first prod because it was inserted by a user conypiece who prod tagged around twenty Sinn Féin and Republican related articles at the same time.--Padraig (talk) 16:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I did not say you had, I just hoped you had not, and you have confirmed that. It was just coincidence as I expected and no offence was meant but your history of removing the first prod without giving any reason stands true. ww2censor (talk) 19:39, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• I didn't see which other articles were tagged by Conypiece, but a lot of stub articles were created last year on Sinn Fein politicians whose only apparent claim to notability was that they were local councillors and/or general election candidate, and this article is one of them. Before removing PROD or other tags, it's best to assess whether the tag was justified, rather than just reverting because you don't like the editor concerned. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs)

• Comment. Why the exclamation mark? The user was quite correct that an article can't be prodded a second time - see WP:PROD#Conflicts. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Why? To make the point, as already written above, that it was the same editor, who removed the first prod without any comment or reason, who then removed the second prod because it had been prodded before. He should have addressed the prod issue in the first place which he did not do. Ok. ww2censor (talk) 14:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - I'm very inclusionist on local politicians, and it's possible that this one would meet my criteria, but neither anything in the article nor anything I've been able to find on the web demonstrates this. No prejudice against re-creation if significant coverage by reliable third party sources crops up. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 21:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. I don't think that either being one of 29 councillors in a county with a population of of 150,000 or being a parliamentary candidate is enough for notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:36, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete. As per wiki notability guidelines. Even if notability is a silly concept. What difference does it make if the page did stay. Doesn't cost anybody anything. It's not as though people need to use the page name or anything. Flawed system.--Play Brian Moore (talk) 14:25, 26 March 2008 (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.