Talk:James Andrew Corcoran

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Hangon

Firstly someone with an entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia should not go through a speedy deletion, but a full AFD vote. Secondly this was not just the "editor of a newsletter" but also the theologian for the American bishops in Vatican I (the position that the present Pope held for the German bishops in Vatican II) and the author of the "Spalding Formula" on papal infalibility. JASpencer (talk) 21:00, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, we can't ascertain any of this without refs included in the article. Would you be so kind as to include them? If they really do establish these things those should be mentioned primarily in the article, not the periodical, and they should be sourced.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 21:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

There is a reference to the Catholic Encyclopedia article. I'd also say that a speedy deletion is an abuse of the speedy deletion process when there is a Catholic Encyclopedia article. JASpencer (talk) 21:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

That's poppycock. Just because something is included in another encyclopedia doesn't make it worthy for inclusion in ours. Or for that matter, inclusion in the "Catholic Encyclopedia" does not afford it any special privileges, and is still subject to all the same notability, criteria for speedy deletion and other guidelines. Pumpmeup 00:41, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

No, I was saying that it was unwise to use the speedy deletion process. To use a process that is designed for unambiguous cases for a subject that, due to its inclusion in another encyclopedia, cannot be an unambiguous deletion. JASpencer (talk) 08:29, 12 January 2008 (UTC)