User talk:Fergananim

This user may have left Wikipedia. Fergananim has not edited Wikipedia since December 2019. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Archives

Fergananim Archive I Fergananim Archive II Fergananim Archive III Fergananim Archive IV Fergananim Archive V Fergananim Archive VI Fergananim Archive VII Fergananim Archive VIII Fergananim Archive IX Fergananim Archive X Fergananim Archive XI Fergananim Archive XII Fergananim Archive XIII Fergananim Archive XIV

Article created without any sources

Your article, Ó_Brolaigh does not cite any sources.

With the interest in keepings things accurate can you add some sources to prove this surname has actually existed at some point. Thanks, PascalsCalculatingHamster (talk) 00:19, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just a heads up...

Your recent page moves are contrary to the policy of using the commonly used name in English language academia and will be reverted to their original namespace. Mabuska ^(talk) 21:12, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the said policy. Mabuska ^(talk) 22:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also your edits within the articles will also be reverted per the above policy. It doesn't matter what their "correct form" is as if its not the commonly used name in English then it goes after the common name typically in the form of: Brian O'Rourke (Irish: Brian na Múrtha Ó Ruairc). This is not the Gaelic Wikipedia. It has its own. Mabuska ^(talk) 23:37, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mabuska, those forms are the commonly used names in English language academia in Ireland. Fergananim (talk) 14:57, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Prove it. And does that trump English language academia outside of Ireland? No. Does that trump common name? No. As you no doubt see in your notifications more pages have been moved back and edits reverted. Mabuska ^(talk) 14:42, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly do not know where to start replying to that, but here goes. Do you mean that all English language sources trump ones in non-English languages? It is considered good practise to use such forms in Irish academica - read any book by Four Courts Press or in the Directory of Irish Biography to see what I mean. And now that you ask, yes it should trump practise outside of Ireland, but that's a whole other day's work! You have a point about common name use, but that too depends on a preponderance of English-language sources which by their nature Anglicise. There is no correct way to render non-English names into English, so surely the form of the name, according to the language concerned, holds some force? I'm really trying to find ground we can agree on because the implications of what you have posted is so disturbing - are all such names on Wikipedia to become Anglicised??? Fergananim (talk) 13:22, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For example - Llywelyn ap Gruffudd, Donnchadh, Earl of Carrick, Æthelred of Wessex, Rognvald Eysteinsson are either partly or fully in non-English language forms, yet are on English-language Wiki. Surely there should be some leeway too for the likes of those concerning us? Fergananim (talk) 13:41, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Actually yes English language sources trump non-English language sources on the English language Wikipedia, that is what WP:ENGLISH basically says. Native forms of names can and are on many articles easily appended to the lede as I have done on many of those articles you moved undiscussed and against policy. What the policy is about is making it easier for people to recognise and understand what they are looking for and reading by using the names that pre-dominate in common English usage. For example people will be looking for Rory O'Donnell not Rudhraighe Ó Domhnaill. People will be looking for Hugh O'Neill not Aodh Mór Ó Néill. So it is not disturbing and no not all names are to be Anglicised especially when their is a long established Anglicised form of them used in academia and common usage!

I am not the only editor who has reverted your page moves in the past or recently on the same argument and I am not against using the Irish forms for article titles when they are needed, though in those case's it is usually in regards to early medieval and pre-Norman/pre-Tudor Ireland and backed by academic works in the English language such as A New History of Ireland and works by historians such as Sean Duffy. You should see the lengthy and protracted argument I with an obstinate editor in getting rid of the Ulidia (kingdom) article as common form in modern English academia is the old-Irish form Ulaid. Also when it comes to naming articles you don't need to give the full name, but the parts of it they are commonly known by.

For your benefit here are naming policies: Wikipedia:Article_titles#Use_commonly_recognizable_names and Wikipedia:Article_titles#Foreign_names_and_anglicization. So please adhere to them and start discussions about moving articles at the Ireland WikiProject. Mabuska ^(talk) 14:32, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll have to read all this carefully as its not my intention cause trouble. Cheers, Fergananim (talk) 14:44, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No-one says your causing trouble :-) Mabuska ^(talk) 22:33, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for March 14

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hill of Tara, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Milesians. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:04, 14 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Pádraic Quinn

The article Pádraic Quinn has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Alexf505 (talk) 23:19, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mary Kavanagh for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mary Kavanagh is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Kavanagh until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rogermx (talk) 17:22, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article references

I've noticed your recent content edits to articles lacking inline references. Some, such as theMary Elmes article - which you created and I've substantially improved. Where you have added them, you've merely placed them in the "External links" section. Is there a reason for this? I ask because it can be annoying to other editors who want to improve articles. Thanks. UaMaol (talk) 21:17, 29 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the improvements, Uamaol. Its because I never learned how to make such references, as I'm not very good with technology. So till I do, I create articles as simply as possible and hope that other editors will improve on them. Sorry for the trouble, not my intention! Fergananim (talk) 14:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, fair enough. I thought it might be something along those lines. Referencing can be a bit difficult to grasp at first but it's super easy once you get the basics down, Don't ever be afraid to practice in your sandbox or on live articles. The foundation made a really useful video a few years ago showing how easy and straight forward it is, not requiring any understanding of wikicode (it's helpful to understand the basics but not required at all). You can watch it here. If you are stuck or require any help at all, such as checking to make sure everything worked or anything unrelated, feel free to give me a shout on my talk page. It might take a while for me to reply, but I should be able to point you in the right direction. :) UaMaol (talk) 17:32, 15 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for that! When I finally get some time, I really must do that - and thanks for the offer! Fergananim (talk) 15:44, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Of

Hi User:Fergananim, asking because I saw your edits on Kelly (surname), just wondered if on Maiorana, if "of" should be added where it says: "dialectic term for a type (of) oregano"?
It won't let me make edits to the Maiorana page, but just noticed this mistakes, let me know pls, cheers.--Theo Mandela (talk) 02:31, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rory O'Connor

I'll not object to this page move as that is how he is commonly referred to in historical academia, however I will be keeping an eye out for Tudor period ones who are called by their English names. Mabuska ^(talk) 19:48, 3 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you, Mabuska. Not only in historical academia, but it is how he was referred to in Irish accounts written in or shortly after his lifetime. There seems to a lack of understanding among some editors that Gaeilge was also a written language! I would prefer to see forms as Gaeilge used as often as possible, but this is not always possible and in some cases not desirable anyway. Fergananim (talk) 14:45, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A bit of help

As an editor I'm guessing is well versed in the Irish language could you please give me a translation of the following motto please: "Lámh dhearg air chlogad lúptha". I know the first part is "Red hand" but I can't figure out the rest. Also have you ever come across a clan/sept known as "Ó Farguill", which I'm assuming is Anglicised as O'Fergal, but would prefer a better one? Mabuska ^(talk) 12:19, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

While I'm not a fluent Gaeilgeoir, it seems a made-up motto, and not one I have previously heard. "Ó Farguill" is a new one on me too; perhaps it means Ó Fearghail ('O'Farrell')? Fergananim (talk) 13:13, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The name and motto come from Dermot O'Connors 18th-century publication Blazons and Irish Heraldic Terminology. I do suspect spellings have possibly change since then, or that it is maybe even an extinct surname. Even if made up can you give a rough guess as to what it seems to say? Mabuska ^(talk) 14:30, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Rather it comes from a 1990 review of O'Connors work by N.J.A. Williams, to which he states at the start of the list of names: The MS was written by O'Connor in 1723. I have added marks of length silently. Punctuation, capitalisation and word division are also mine. Letters or words to be omitted are shown in round brackets. Additions to O'Connor's text are shown in square brackets. Editorial comments are shown in curled brackets. Abbreviations I expand silently except in doubtful cases where they are italicised.. Whether that helps make any sense of it I don't know, but here is how it appears in the document: Ó FARGUILL: Air uaithne leoghan cuthach órdha. Creast: Cú dubh agus diucal coronet. Creast eile: Lámh dhearg air chlogad lúptha. Mabuska ^(talk) 14:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I assuming Cú dubh agus diucal coronet means a black hound on a ducal coronet? If so then looking at Google, that sits atop the coat of arms of the O'Farrells, so it most likely is them then. Mabuska ^(talk) 14:41, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced changes

Please stop making unreferenced changes, especially to Irish names and spelling, on Wikipedia. On many occassions you're changing from referenced spellings to unreferenced and even if they are not previously referenced you're not providing references to back up your changes. In the future please provide references to back up your changes. Canterbury Tail talk 02:33, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Fergananim. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 15

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Séamus, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages French and Gaelic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unreferenced changes and moves

Please refrain from moving articles to other names when there is no references for said names. You recently incorrectly moved the article for Mairtin Thornton to an Irish name without any kind of references. This Irish name was completely unreferenced, and the Anglicized name is what all the references used. Additionally the Anglicized name is the name he fought under and was billed as so the article should not be under the Irish name, if that even was his name (as no evidence has been presented.) Please stop making unreferenced changes to articles on Wikipedia, and especially stop making changes that go against the references provided. I note that you've been asked to stop this previously but you still continue to do so. Canterbury Tail talk 00:51, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Rónán mac Colmáin (Irish poet) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rónán mac Colmáin (Irish poet) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rónán mac Colmáin (Irish poet) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Kirbanzo (talk) 18:38, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 2

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Medieval Welsh literature, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages British and Irish (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bulks moves from English names

Hi, can you please seek consensus on talk pages or WikiProjects before you start moving articles in bulk? This is the English Wikipedia and most of these subjects are primarily known by their English names. Thanks, — Jon C.^ॐ 12:10, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

But I am not moving names in bulk, I am carefully considering who to name, and if it should be done at all, on an individual basis. There are many with whom it is not appropriate, so I don't. I am basing this both on their actual lives, and the fact that it is good scholarly practise to name people by the names they used themselves. Furthermore I never remove the Anglicised forms entirely from the article, as that is part of their matter and should be respected (indeed, its why I don't move so many articles; its not appropriate). Lastly, I am not translating any part of the article into Gaeilge, so I am fully respecting the fact that these are Wikipedia articles written in English. Fergananim (talk) 11:23, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, but who says it's "good scholarly practice to name people by the names they used themselves"? By that logic we'd have William the Conquerer at Williame I, Vlad the Impaler at something like Vlad Țepeș or Vlad Dragulya, and Ivan the Terrible at Ива́н Васи́льевич. It's better practice to call people by the name by which they're most well known in English. — Jon C.^ॐ 15:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Because that is generally scholarly practise here in Ireland. The sources, links, and quotes I place into articles show that. It's better practice to call people by the name by which they're most well known in English. Better practise for whom? And on what basis? Fergananim (talk) 10:09, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's basically the entire principle of WP:USEENGLISH. Are the Irish names more common in the bulk of reliable, English-language sources? — Jon C.^ॐ 16:41, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also you have been warned several times to stop moving pages and renaming things without sources. Most of your moves are not supported by the sources in the article and you are moving them based purely on your own understanding. Stop doing so. If you say that someone's name is incorrect you MUST provide a source for the new name as the original names on Wikipedia are the ones supported by the sources and not your new names. Since you have been warned multiple times on this consider this your final warning. The next time you move a page, or rename something to your understanding of the name without a source you will be blocked from editing. Canterbury Tail talk 14:27, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I have been at times remiss in demonstrating the basis of their names, but I have made an effort. I draw your attention to Seán mac an Iarla a Búrc, where I have added Gaelic sources concerning him which, when noted thus, validate the form of name. Likewise moving the likes of Íomhaor mac Tighearnán Mág Tighearnán (where I removed the Anglocentric numeric and corrected the incorrect DEFAULSORT surname) is based on Gaelic practise which is validated by documents cited or linked within the article. Gaelic texts and their forms are primary because that was the world they lived in and they plainly show those were the naming-terms used. Insisting on English-language forms as the only valid forms is inappropriate; at best, an Anglicised form of the name can be given, but certainly not insisted upon. Now when we move into the 17th and 18th centuries there IS a valid basis as more and more of the people concerned were bilingual in Gaeilge and English, and that needs some consideration. Granted, I have not always made these points plain - partly because I consider them so obviously demonstratble either in the text or its sources; or because there are so many such errors to fix it overwhelms me. I will make an effort but I must impress upon you NONE of these changes are either arbitrary or even my personal whim. All have a basis. They are misunderstood because Anglicised forms are privileged and because plainly so few other editors know much about them. So there is lots of room for confusion. So, in mitigation, please list me such articles and I will do my best to demonstrate the basis, case by case. Fergananim (talk) 13:20, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding, much appreciated. I appreciate that a lot of these people are really without anglicised names and that is fair. At the end of the day however this is the English language Wikipedia so their most commonly used name, in English language sources, takes precedent over any proper other form. If English language sources use a non-anglicised name primarily, then that's obviously fine, but if they use a different form then we need to use that no matter what the Irish source may say. (See WP:IMOS for the policies on this.) The main reason for me posting these messages is that many of the articles you have moved are sourced to the original article names, and all sources listed in the article use that form. Moving an article to another name when every source in the article states it to be something else is not something that can be supported. If you can provide updated sources then that's fine, but remember Wikipedia is based on Wp:Verifiability not truth. If the sources all state one form of name and you move it to another form without any sources to support it, under Wikipedia's policies it will be moved back no matter if you think it's obvious or not. We have to go by the sources. I hope you can appreciate this. Canterbury Tail talk 13:36, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@talk Miler Magrath was an Archbishop of the C of E (inter alia), he clearly spoke English and Gaelic, and he changed his name to MAGRATH to distinguish it from the catholic McGRATH, and was buried under the coat of arms he designed for MAGRATH. Changing it to a gaelic name he never had is not fixing anglicizations, it's historically wrong. He was NEVER a Mac Graith, he was a McGrath and a Magrath, period. Your edits are wrong. I appreciate the desire to reclaim the Irish Gaelic but you cannot rename a man who lived for nearly 100 years and died under the name MILER MAGRATH. I see this is common by you and others, but unless you have a historic source confirming he used the Gaelic version I think the version he had printed on his own tomb is his name and you have no right to re-name him 400 years later. Please undo or provide some justification, because Miler's tomb is on wikipedia and I have ample justification to undo your edit. Apologies for poor wikipedia talk skills, but those *should* be no match for just making shit up that was never true when the man lived and died. TorontoGavin (talk) 21:13, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Bulk adding of Category:Gaels is inappropriate

Please familiarize yourself with Help:Categories. These individuals are already in subcategories of Gaels, so this category should not be added. Catrìona (talk) 13:50, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I concur (and had just popped onto your talk page to make the same point). The category "Gaels" is (in effect) a meta-category. Broken down (as it should be) into appropriate sub-categories. If, as seems to be the case, you are planning to add every single Irish-born/descended person to this category (everyone from Cormacan Eigeas to Mick Lally and the 1000 years in between) then the category will be come overpopulated in the extreme. If this is not the intent, and perhaps instead there is an intent to "pick and chose" a sub-set of Irish-born/descended people into this "Gaels" category, then what inclusion criteria is being used? And why? What is the benchmark for "Gael"ness - that is the inclusion criteria for the parent/meta category? Guliolopez (talk) 17:03, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Opps, you are both right, and I have tried do as you advised, Catrìona. Sorry! I am certainly not going to add everyone, am trying to choose carefully. The method for inclusion is 1 - ethnic, for medieval/early modern times; 2 - linguistic, for modern times. I grant there is overlap between the two, but that is the rough chronological distinction driving my choices (hence no one surnamed Breathnach, de Bhailís, or Mac Coisdealbhaigh till the 18th-21st centuries). To be honest, I felt I was about done, that the category has more than enough articles and a good, general spread to get the idea across. Was going to include a few more Scots, but meh. Am aware of the Irish and Scot categories, simply wanted to add Gael here and there to denote it was a category that was and still does transcend those bounds. In a different way, as does British. Fergananim (talk) 17:20, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Fergananim. Those inclusion criteria seem very personal (as in "in your own head", and not listed anywhere on the project), and very subjective. The latter is particularly concerning because both of those criteria (ethnicity and language) are open to interpretation and abuse. And will almost certainly result in warring. I appreciate I am skirting close to Godwin's law here, but swap "Gael" for "Aryan" (or "Britishness"), and now start applying personal subjectivity to whether and who (based on parentage/ethnicity) is allowed to call themselves "British", or whether and who (based on an ability speak English) is allowed to call themselves "American". It's dodgy as heck. Which is why we have a guideline which expects that list and category inclusion criteria to be "unambiguous, objective, and supported by reliable sources". Including Mick Lally (because of an entirely subjective and personal opinion about his roots or language ability), at the arbitrary exclusion of other contemporaries, is just not appropriate. Or that Nuala Ní Dhomhnaill rates higher on an undefined "Gael-ness scale" than Brendan Behan or any number of other Irish language writers. Are people born in the Pale docked marks on the Gael-ness scale? You either need to button down the criteria into "unambiguous, objective, and reliably sourced facts", or reconsider the approach. Guliolopez (talk) 21:22, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For much of its history, Gaeil was an ethnic term, the linguistic aspect quite secondary. In very modern times (while retaining the ethnic aspect) it is far more understood in terms of someone who speaks the language as their mother language. That is entirely an aspect of its modern decline both in Ireland and Britain. However Wiki may defines Gaeil, it may not be factual; as with other Gaelic subjects its definitions are too Anglo and not always respect Gaelic sources. I did not list Behan as a Gaeil as it was not his mother language and he identified as Irish, not Gaeil - the two have NEVER been identical. Ní Dhomhnaill and Lally (his surname in English) were Gaeilgeoirí from childhood as that was their community langauge, and Gaeil their communities' ethnic term. So I included them. Behan was not and did not so I didn't. Those are not my personal definitions, they are the historic and current ones. Since the very early 1600s, the common term for both native Irish nations, the Gaeil and the Gaill, was a previously rare word not commonly used as Gaeilge - Éireannaigh. Hence "The Irish (Irish: Muintir na hÉireann or Na hÉireannaigh)" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_people). I freely admit some doubt over a number of those people and groups included - interestingly, none of which were the subject of any of your edits! - as many were once NOT held to be Gaeil at all. But the majority of their descendants considered themselves such, so, on that basis, with some grudging, I included them. And as the contexts of the articles makes clear, both by ethnicity and language the majority of those folk were Gaeil. Nevertheless. I will seek out "unambiguous, objective, and reliably sourced facts", or reconsider my approach. By drawing an analogy with Britishness, I merely intended to denote it too is an ethnic cateogry not bound by the Irish Sea (I have no idea how Aryan applies in these contexts, so did not use it, either). Can I ask you, how do you understand the term Gaeil? Fergananim (talk) 14:13, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I note that you were asked twice in January 2010 to use edit summaries

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Edit summary (Briefly describe your changes)

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

• User contributions
• Recent changes
• Watchlists
• Revision differences
• IRC channels
• Related changes
• New pages list
• Article editing history

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Doug Weller talk 15:27, 24 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Opps again. Will do! Fergananim (talk) 14:38, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Koch

Thanks for the edit summaries. You must learn to cite properly, and here's how you do it.

Wikipedia:Meetup/UMassAmherst/Intro to Wikipedia and Help:Referencing for beginners should tell you all you need to know. You need to cite the actual source although you can add the Academic.edu link. Not everything on that site is properly published. Please avoid using the word "however" (see WP:Words to watch and if there are "others" you need to cite them or that must be in the source. As for the quote, I don't know if it's appropriate as I was only concerned about its length, but please cut it down to just a bit over 200 words. Thanks. Doug Weller talk 15:29, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Doug. Its tough as what appears is already greatly reduced in size. But I will try. Fergananim (talk) 15:38, 26 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 27

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Gaels, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page French Empire (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:33, 27 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 25

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Ann Glover, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Fitton (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:09, 25 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Fergananim. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of James Finnegan (singer-songwriter)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on James Finnegan (singer-songwriter) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a band or musician that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. SITH (talk) 18:43, 29 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Celtic categories

You must stop your emptying of these categories. As I already pointed out in reply to you on my talk page, identical behaviour by Brough87 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) was found to be improper and disruptive. DuncanHill (talk) 11:33, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Its not improper or disruptive to clean up overcategorisation, nor to remove false ethnic links. Not one of those were ethnic Celtic peoples. However, I did add as many actual Celts and People of Celtic Descent to fill it up. No problem! Fergananim (talk) 11:35, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did you just revert ALL of them? Seriously ... Fergananim (talk) 11:36, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Its has already been found to be disruptive. You must stop. Also, using an alternative account to evade a topic ban is a blockable matter. DuncanHill (talk) 11:39, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But I don't use any alternative accounts. This is me, always. Anyway, in what way is it disruptive? Fergananim (talk) 11:40, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Duncan, you are the person that caused the problem by creating this spurious category in the first place. If you want to avoid disruptive episodes with good-faith editors like myself, please, remove it. Fergananim (talk) 11:43, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11:43, 25 January 2019 (UTC) −

Your edits as I have pointed out are identical as those of Brough87. You are emptying categories with no consensus to do so. You will know from the edit histories of the articles that these edits have previously been reverted. If you feel the categories are improper then you should propose them for deletion, but you must not pay them beforehand. DuncanHill (talk) 11:45, 25 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you created these categories without consensus either, so you can hardly throw that at me. I have no idea who Brough87 is - I edit by this name alone. But his or her points do stand. Really, its up to you to allow corrections to your own mistake or at least propose it for deletion yourself. 12:20, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

I did not create those categories. Stop lying. If you think a category should be deleted, then you should nominate it for deletion. I do not think they should be deleted, so I shall not be nominating them. Stop asking me to act in bad faith. DuncanHill (talk) 19:57, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 26

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mithridates I of the Bosporus, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Galatian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Category:People of Celtic descent

You must stop dishonestly claiming that I created Category:People of Celtic descent. As is perfectly clear from the history, I did no such thing. DuncanHill (talk) 19:56, 26 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Yet you did add it several times, correct? If so, why? Fergananim (talk) 12:47, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have added it where I see it as appropriate, or re-added it where it has been improperly removed, for example by you. You must nit keep removing it. You can propose it for deletion if you think that proper, or open discussions on relevant talk pages. DuncanHill (talk) 15:28, 30 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But as none of those peoples were or are Celts or Celtic, it is not appropriate, thus it is entirely proper to remove it. So unless you want to revert it all over again, please, explain why you think that category is appropriate to apply to any of those nations. Fergananim (talk) 16:06, 31 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If you think the categories are improper, either nominate them for deletion, or open a Request for Comment on them. All of them, not one or two here and there, to be followed by others later. If you do nominate them for deletion then you MUST tag the category pages appropriately. DuncanHill (talk) 14:44, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which STILL does not answer why you added the category to so many others in the first place. Fergananim (talk) 17:32, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't. I restored it when it was improperly removed. Anyway, whether or not I added it has no bearing on your disruptive behaviour. You have been repeatedly advised of the correct way forward with categories you believe are incorrect. You have repeatedly lied about my contributions, you opened a DRN about me without informing me, you started a CfD without tagging the category page, and you have repeatedly failed to observe BRD. DuncanHill (talk) 17:40, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Which does not explain why they were improperly added in the first place. Really, you must explain the basis of why you thought it could be used both for Iron Age folk and modern populations. I have not repeatedly lied about your contributions; I held on only one or two occasions that you created that category. When you showed this was not so, I didn't say so again. You have implied I am another editor; I assure you this is not so, and surely edit histories would demonstrate that? I didn't know that I should so inform you, as I thought it would be handled entirely by other editors - and anyways, as you did not create the category and fail to give any reason for using it, why should that bother you? Yours in genuine puzzlement, Fergananim (talk) 17:55, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The DRN page explicitly tells you that you MUST inform the editor(s) whose behaviour you are questioning. The CfD instructions explicitly tell you that you MUST tag the category page. I did not "add" the category to lots of others, I restored it after improper removal. I have repeatedly advised you of the proper procedure, and you have repeatedly failed to follow it. I shall not be replying to any further comments by you in this thread. DuncanHill (talk) 18:03, 1 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What a bizarre category! People of Irish descent are somehow also of Celtic descent, because... "Irish, and therefore must be Celtic"? Completely ignoring genetics, invasions by many ethnicities, etc.? The cat is definitely ripe for deletion, or at least a note to say "Don't add this to modern-day people!" and Feargananim was entirely correct to remove it from articles about modern-day people. Bastun^Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:29, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking about it and after a quick look, it's an entirely superfluous super-cat. I may ping BHG tomorrow about the best way to handle this. Bastun^Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:32, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. On looking better I see that's already been done. Don't mind me! Bastun^Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ! 15:52, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Robert McClenon. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, John Carlos (photographer), and have marked it as unpatrolled. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Robert McClenon (talk) 17:12, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A stupid comment by Twinkle, but I was trying to ensure that it didn't leave the page marked as reviewed after I had tagged it as needing better references. The whole point is that the page is still or again marked as needing another review. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:17, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Okay. Have added the best I can find online; if ones in print can be located, shall do so. Meanwhile just kept it simple. Cheers, Fergananim (talk) 17:20, 4 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

John Carlos (photographer) moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, John Carlos (photographer), does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Boleyn (talk) 15:26, 30 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Conchobar Mac Con Raoí for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Conchobar Mac Con Raoí is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conchobar Mac Con Raoí until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. — JFG ^talk 12:57, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Fearghus Ó Conchúir

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Fearghus Ó Conchúir requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.asiw.co.uk/news/irish-choreographer-named-ad-of-national-dance-company. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. S Philbrick(Talk) 16:23, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Moving pages

Please stop moving pages from the long-standing English name to the Irish name, as you did with Rory O'Moore; and especially a long made-up name, as you did with Rory O'More. Any such moves should go through Wikipedia:Requested moves. --Scolaire (talk) 16:48, 17 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, if you'd taken the trouble to look at Talk:Rory O'More you would have seen that I said the same thing eight years ago, not to mention the mess you made of the other page per Talk:Rory O'Moore. Please, just stop doing it. Scolaire (talk) 08:12, 18 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is at Dubious renaming of hundreds of articles over many years --Scolaire (talk) 12:06, 21 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Uí Dúnchada

Hello, Fergananim,

Thanks for creating Uí Dúnchada! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

This has been tagged for one issue.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 20:34, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Boleyn! I need all the help I can get as I am not technically adept. Will create more pages on the same theme as soon as I can. Fergananim (talk) 11:21, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, though, and with all due respect, would it not be better to take the time to become "technically adept" than to continue to create articles with the same faults? Scolaire (talk) 12:37, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The rule is wrong. A person's actual name should be respected. That is the issue, not purely technical matters. Those forms moved to were neither "completely made up", "a crazy long name" or "just translating names into Irish" (????? a truly bizzare statement), let alone "ridiculous" or " inappropriate". All were the actual name of the persons concerned and/or reflected use in Irish culture. It is "generally scholarly practise here in Ireland". Many articles such as John O'Goband and Cornelius M'Gelany I left alone as I was unsure what their actual surname really was, while the likes of Richard le Blond was merely defaulted to the correct form. I never translated names; that would have been woefully inappropriate, especially for Irish people who never identified as Gaeil or even spoke the language. And I did try to keep it era-appropriate rather than mass-moves for folks from the last two centuries (which would have been doubly inappropriate). There was not much point in asking for discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland - while I would have welcomed it, it would have attracted no interest (still no response for Máire Ní Ciaragain), or a bias against those forms (which is where you come in). So I do apologise for any purely technical errors - which are genuinely unintended - but not this. The rule is wrong. Fergananim (talk) 14:08, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not talking about moving pages now. The outcome of that discussion is in the section below. I'm saying that the rules for creating an article include stuff like inline citations. Have a read of WP:Citing sources. If that is too heavy for you, just look at the source page of something like Battle of Clontarf to see how cite book, cite journal and cite web are used in an article. At any time when editing (or creating), you can click on the blue "Cite" at the top of the editing page (Advanced→Special characters→Help→Cite – you don't need to click it if it's black), and in the drop-down "Templates" list that appears, click "cite book" or whatever, and just fill in the details. If possible, you should use online refs, such as CELT, so we can see that the information is correct and don't just have to take your word for it. Try this in your sandbox for a while before launching into creating articles that may be nominated for deletion. I think you have a contribution to make towards creating an encyclopaedia, but you need to make the effort to do it properly. Scolaire (talk) 15:12, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. That can be beyond me at times, try as I might. I have never been technically astute and struggle with it still, but generally leave some citation for quoted material. Fergananim (talk) 15:17, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And by the way, I have nominated Máire Ní Ciaragain for deletion. Scolaire (talk) 17:44, 24 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that you are subject to a community restriction

Per consensus of the community in this discussion, you are banned indefinitely from moving any page on Wikipedia. You are free to propose page moves for discussion and to participate in discussions started by others, subject to our usual standards of editing and conduct. Violating this restriction may result in more severe restrictions including being blocked from editing. If you have any questions you may ask here, on my talk page, or at the administrators' noticeboard. The restriction is logged here. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 18:25, 23 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive editing

Hello. This is a message to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions, such as the edit you made to British Isles, did not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please take some time to familiarise yourself with our policies and guidelines. You can find information about these at our welcome page which also provides further information about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. If you only meant to make test edits, please use the sandbox for that. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you may leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. Canterbury Tail talk 01:53, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 25

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John O'Donovan (scholar), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hugh O'Neill (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:04, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removing categories

Hi Fergananim. I noticed you removed Category:Year of birth unknown on a number of articles yesterday, as well as Category:14th-century births, Category:15th-century births, Category:15th-century deaths etc. These are administrative categories specifically created for historical figures, and necessary for administrative reasons to keep track of biographies where date of birth and/or death are unknown or vague. Can I ask you to go back and replace those categories, and be sure not to remove them in the future? You might consider adding those categories where they don't already exist when doing such edits again. Thanks. Scolaire (talk) 12:21, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I felt that those categories were best replaced with something more definitive pertaining to chronology, but I stand corrected. Will do. Cheers. Fergananim (talk) 14:27, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On that note, would you prefer I add them to all such articles? It seems a bit category-excessive, but if required, I shall. Fergananim (talk) 14:44, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, please. It's an administrative thing. It's so that every biography can be categorised by DOB and DOD even if it's "xth century", "unknown", or "missing" (for more recent people). Scolaire (talk) 15:33, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Will do! Fergananim (talk) 15:33, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Two things: (1) having read the heading at Category:Year of birth unknown I've discovered that "unknown" is to be added even when "xth century" is there. I thought it was either/or, and I revered your edits before I discovered my mistake. Sorry about that (they're all fixed now). (2) be careful not to put a colon before the word "Category", e.g. [[:Category:15th-century births]]. That makes it appear as text instead of actually adding the article to the category. Regards, Scolaire (talk) 21:34, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Damnit, that slipped in - sorry! Fergananim (talk) 11:02, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve Raghnall Dall Mac Domhnaill

Hello, Fergananim,

Thanks for creating Raghnall Dall Mac Domhnaill! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

This has been tagged for 1 issue.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 19:55, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Eibhlín Ní Chonghaile

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Eibhlín Ní Chonghaile requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Bbb23 (talk) 16:00, 23 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon O'Neill

Dear Fergananim. As you have perhaps noted, I made some alterations on your article Gordon O'Neil. I have been bold and you might perhaps want to revert some of my changes, but I hope you will at lest find some of them useful. You are far more experienced than I am. I read a bit of D'Alton and I did not even understand in which regiment he served during the Williamite war. It is sure that he was the colonel of the Regiment Charlemont in French service. D'Alton mentions O'Neils Dragoons but seems to say that regiment was raised by somebody called Neill O'Neill (who is that?). Pardon my ignorance. I believe the sfn is the best way for the citations in this article, would you agree? I would be pleased to hear from you. Johannes Schade (talk) 10:09, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Hello Johannes. Thanks for the message. Not at all, it reads fine to me. However, I am withdrawing from Wikipedia so am doing fewer and fewer edits. I would urge you to see if there are more modern research on him and others like him; Seanchas Ard Mhacha, Clogher Record, and others are excellent journals of scholarship that can be used. Likewise, your local library should have copies of the relevant History and Society series for your county which may likely mention him (http://www.geographypublications.com/product-category/history-society/). The Directory of Irish Biography may mention him (https://dib.cambridge.org/). Lastly, and most useful for men like O'Neill, The Irish Sword (http://www.mhsi.ie/sword.htm). Read their article listings or contact them directly for help. Cheers! Fergananim (talk) 13:20, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Mairéad Ní Chuaig

The article Mairéad Ní Chuaig has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication this biography passes WP:NBIO.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:10, 11 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:03, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 23

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Seanchaí, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Gaelic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:22, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Crínóc

The article Crínóc has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable name attested from single person who apparently has no claim to notability; we are not a baby names directory.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:40, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cumman

The article Cumman has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. We are not a directory of names that existed in the historical record. Not suitable to be turned into a disambig or redirect due to lack of article titles sharing this name.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:43, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dubhóg

The article Dubhóg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. We are not a directory of names that existed in the historical record. Not suitable to be turned into a disambig or redirect due to lack of article titles sharing this name.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:44, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Anlaith

The article Anlaith has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:35, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Condal (given name)

The article Condal (given name) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for two people (neither of whom have articles anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:36, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dailfind

The article Dailfind has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:36, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dúnlaith

The article Dúnlaith has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for a few people, who don't even have articles. We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Dubh Themrach

The article Dubh Themrach has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:40, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gnathnad

The article Gnathnad has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:40, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gelgéis

The article Gelgéis has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:42, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Finbil

The article Finbil has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:42, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lígach

The article Lígach has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:43, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lerben

The article Lerben has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:43, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lerthan

The article Lerthan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:43, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Lathir

The article Lathir has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:44, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sebdann

The article Sebdann has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:48, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sétach

The article Sétach has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested as a given name for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). The reference given doesn't say anything about these families bearing the name (and I didn't find any others), so that fails WP:V. We are not simply a directory of historical names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:49, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sinech

The article Sinech has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested for one person (who doesn't have an article anyway). We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:50, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sisuile

The article Sisuile has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. Only attested twice, for apparently non-notable people. We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:51, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Táethen

The article Táethen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable given name. No indication it was ever attested for anyone notable. We are not simply a directory of historical given names.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:51, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Colette Nic Aodha

Hello, Fergananim. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Colette Nic Aodha".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! JMHamo (talk) 08:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Donncha Mac Con Iomaire

The article Donncha Mac Con Iomaire has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable television producer. WP:BEFORE shows no substantial coverage other than press releases

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 14:38, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Scandlán Mór

The article Scandlán Mór has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NN poet, utterly fails the GNG and WP:POET. The article has been completely unimproved since its creation over a decade ago. No sources discussing him save for mirrors of this two-sentence article. Also prodding the poem, which has its own article likewise lacking in sources, and for which the claim to notability is that this guy wrote it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ravenswing 23:13, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Is é mo shámud re mnái

The article Is é mo shámud re mnái has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

NN poem, fails the GNG. No information available except that the poet wrote it. Notability tagged for over a decade, and completely unimproved in all that time. I would do a redirect to the poet, except that (a) given the poem's age and Irish title, this is an astonishingly unlikely search term, and (b) the poet himself utterly fails the GNG and WP:POET, that article's gone unimproved in over a decade, and the whole content of the article is the converse of this one: "Scandlán Mór was an Irish poet, alive in the Middle Irish era. He is given as the author of Is é mo shámud re mnái/Advice to lovers." (Unsurprisingly, the same editor created both articles, and I prodded the other one as well.)

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ravenswing 23:17, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Menott

The article Menott has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Where to start? Let's review. The subject MAY have been the name of an early evangelist, and MAY be represented in this one place name, and MAY have founded a church (for which there are no actual remains), but nothing's actually known about him. This goes well beyond failures of the GNG, WP:BIO, WP:NOR and the like; it's one of the very few failures of WP:V I've ever seen.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ravenswing 07:22, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ulcha Dearg ua Caillidhe

The article Ulcha Dearg ua Caillidhe has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unclear how this subject meets WP:ANYBIO. The only reference we have is a single mention in the Annals of the Four Masters. Which suggests that the subject killed one person. Which perhaps establishes that the person existed. And may have been involved in one event. But WP:EXIST, WP:PERPETRATOR and WP:BIO1E would seem to apply there. None of which would suggest that a 2-line permastub is required. The killer can simply be mentioned in the article on the person he killed. We don't need a redirect or another article to communicate the same information. In reverse. Not everyone who ever existed, even if mentioned in other articles, then also needs their "own" article/redirect/etc....

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 10:53, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Eleanor Ffrench for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Eleanor Ffrench is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eleanor Ffrench until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. TheMrP (talk) 07:16, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tadhg Ó Cuinn for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tadhg Ó Cuinn is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tadhg Ó Cuinn until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rorshacma (talk) 17:30, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Irish immigration to Saint Kitts and Nevis

Thank you for improving the article. I noticed that you did it in 2017 but it took me a while to get back to it and, actually, this was a surprise (it is not very common that other users improve the articles I publish, instead of leaving the article, basically, as I wrote it). You significantly increased the amount of information in the article, and included reliable references in an article I published when I did not yet understand much about the differences between reliable and unreliable sources. So that thanks for improving the article!--Isinbill (talk) 20:12, 25 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Slaine Ní Conmara

The article Slaine Ní Conmara has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable medieval person.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mccapra (talk) 20:45, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Brasil Madden for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Brasil Madden is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brasil Madden (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Guliolopez (talk) 00:28, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Sinéad Ní Loideáin

The article Sinéad Ní Loideáin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I can find no sources to support a claim to notability under WP:GNG or WP:JOURNALIST. A search of the main newspapers of record in Ireland, the Irish Times and Irish Independent stable of regionals, return just one and two pieces of coverage respectively. The singular Irish Times result is a passing mention. The two Irish Independent pieces are short interview pieces which are less than expansive and not independent of the subject. Even if they were, two such pieces would not seem to constitute significant coverage. The three credits listed in IMDB do not indicate the "significant roles in multiple notable films[..] productions" proposed by WP:ENTERTAINER. Not seeing it.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 01:03, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sinéad Ní Loideáin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sinéad Ní Loideáin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Guliolopez (talk) 15:17, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Catherine Kendrigan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Catherine Kendrigan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Catherine Kendrigan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. SL93 (talk) 22:03, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Giorroid Ó Mórdha

The article Giorroid Ó Mórdha has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication that the subject is notable. There seem to be two possible subjects. The titular subject (the person) doesn't seem to meet WP:ANYBIO. In that, the sources do not even confirm that the subject (the person) existed. Not to mind that the person has any notability. The body even implies that the subject may be fictional, and may not even have existed AT ALL. A Google web search on the person name returns all of 40 results. All of which are effectively mirrors of this page. A Google books search returns nothing. The other secondary subject, the folksong in which the person is mentioned, may be covered in the only reference here. But a single mention in a single book falls significantly short of WP:NSONG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 15:25, 10 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Giorroid Ó Mórdha for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Giorroid Ó Mórdha is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Guliolopez (talk) 12:47, 16 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Luighnech Ua Conchobhair's family tree

Since you seem to have access to the sources, would it be possible for you to resolve an ambiguity at Talk:Brian Luighnech Ua Conchobhair#Family tree? Hairy Dude (talk) 12:57, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bernard Kilkeary

The article Bernard Kilkeary has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not seeing significant coverage to satisfy WP:GNG, falls short of WP:SOLDIER

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Dumelow (talk) 18:54, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Patrick Ladeen Curran for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Patrick Ladeen Curran is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Ladeen Curran until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

StarM 18:59, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Murder of Kenneth Salvesen

The article Murder of Kenneth Salvesen has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Does not satisfy the Notability requirement. There is nothing noteworthy about this specific individual other than the fact they were an American Citizen, something that garnered only a token amount more coverage in some corners of the press. The PIRA killed thousands of people, we cannot give afford space for everyone of them to have their own page on Wikipedia. This information can all be moved to other pages such as the Harrods Bombing and Peter King.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. OgamD218 (talk) 05:49, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Bernard Kilkeary for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Bernard Kilkeary is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bernard Kilkeary until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Dumelow (talk) 11:41, 4 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Peter Kavanagh (Irish politician) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peter Kavanagh (Irish politician) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Kavanagh (Irish politician) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Iveagh Gardens (talk) 16:38, 9 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Irish genealogy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Irish genealogy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Irish genealogy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Firestar464 (talk) 03:00, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Pat Hynes for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pat Hynes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pat Hynes until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Iveagh Gardens (talk) 16:53, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Annette Kirwan

The article Annette Kirwan has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Sonofstar (talk) 16:23, 27 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Annette Kirwan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Annette Kirwan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annette Kirwan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Sonofstar (talk) 18:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tommy Coleman

The article Tommy Coleman has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A BEFORE identifies no sourcing to establish notability as an IRA Army or Sinn Fein officer. No obvious redirect target

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. StarM 17:45, 13 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Louise O'Sullivan (Tien-Tsin)

The article Louise O'Sullivan (Tien-Tsin) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

non-notable biography

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Justanothersgwikieditor (talk) 03:14, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Kate McMahon

The article Kate McMahon has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable author.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PepperBeast (talk) 00:11, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of William Cornwall for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Cornwall is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Cornwall until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

- - mathmitch7 ^(talk/contribs) 12:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mary Hammond (Tuam) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mary Hammond (Tuam) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Hammond (Tuam) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

PepperBeast (talk) 00:47, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Liam Dearg Ó Mainnín for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Liam Dearg Ó Mainnín is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liam Dearg Ó Mainnín until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Earle Bartibus Huxley (talk) 22:11, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of M. E. Mitchell for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article M. E. Mitchell is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/M. E. Mitchell until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Boleyn (talk) 18:57, 29 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Martin Oliver (Claddagh) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Martin Oliver (Claddagh) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Oliver (Claddagh) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Boleyn (talk) 10:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Colman Ó Cathasaig

The article Colman Ó Cathasaig has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 06:35, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Seán Ó Conghaile for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Seán Ó Conghaile is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seán Ó Conghaile until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Boleyn (talk) 20:51, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ruaidrí mac Donnchad Ó Dálaigh

The article Ruaidrí mac Donnchad Ó Dálaigh has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 04:19, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

{subst:prodwarningBLP|Aed Ó Finn|concern=}} Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 04:22, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ruaidrí mac Donnchad Ó Dálaigh

The article Ruaidrí mac Donnchad Ó Dálaigh has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The claimed sources do not support the text. None of the linked sources even mention the subject. Even the body of this article states that, other than his name, "nothing is known about the subject". We are so far below the WP:VER, WP:ANYBIO and WP:SIGCOV criteria that I don't even know where to start...

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 14:24, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of James Moriley

The article James Moriley has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Lack of notability. See WP:GNG

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Fathadh mac Aonghus for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fathadh mac Aonghus is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fathadh mac Aonghus (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Fram (talk) 13:31, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tadhg an tSleibhe Ó Fathaigh for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tadhg an tSleibhe Ó Fathaigh is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tadhg an tSleibhe Ó Fathaigh until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Fram (talk) 13:49, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Daniel Madden

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Daniel Madden requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Lavalizard101 (talk) 12:18, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of John Ó Madden

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on John Ó Madden requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Lavalizard101 (talk) 12:18, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Breasal Madden

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Breasal Madden requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Lavalizard101 (talk) 12:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ambrose Madden (chief)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ambrose Madden (chief) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Lavalizard101 (talk) 12:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Ambrose Madden (II)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Ambrose Madden (II) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Lavalizard101 (talk) 12:20, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Blu O'Carroll Cassidy

The article Blu O'Carroll Cassidy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable individual.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ploni (talk) 20:49, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Aingeal Ní Chualáin

The article Aingeal Ní Chualáin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Easily fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ploni (talk) 02:50, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Cornelius McLoughlin

The article Cornelius McLoughlin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

This articles cites no actual direct sources for its material. Additionally, searching for the name "Cornelius McLoughlin" brings up no results in connection to IRA activity. I don't see any substantial basis for this article

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Hugh O'Neill (piper)

The article Hugh O'Neill (piper) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A biography of an individual with no actual claim to notability. Additionally the entire text of the article is copied/pasted directly from the one External Link. Searching for additional sources turns up very little - just other sites mirroring the same text.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Rorshacma (talk) 21:17, 12 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Seán Mac Aoidh

The article Seán Mac Aoidh has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Neither the article nor the sources describe any notability. The subject's notability (if there is any) appears to derive from being the writer of one song/poem. If the song is notable (and there is no evidence that it meets WP:NSONG) then any notability wouldn't transfer to its author. Otherwise there is no evidence that WP:SIGCOV or WP:NCREATIVE is met. A WP:BEFORE search returns only this Wikipedia article and a few trivial passing mentions in music collections/catalogues. I can find ZERO biographical information about the subject to support WP:ANYBIO or similar.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 13:55, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Domnall na Madhmann Mac Suibhne

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Domnall na Madhmann Mac Suibhne requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a real person or group of people that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Star Mississippi 14:27, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Neev Kennedy for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Neev Kennedy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neev Kennedy until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Blue Edits (talk) 09:28, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Úna MacLochlainn

The article Úna MacLochlainn has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:32, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Giolla Finna mac Uallacháin/Coulahan for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Giolla Finna mac Uallacháin/Coulahan is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Giolla Finna mac Uallacháin/Coulahan until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Fram (talk) 15:24, 20 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Ambrose Madden (III)

The article Ambrose Madden (III) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability. Either in the text or the references. A BEFORE also returns nothing of note. That we do not even seem to have sufficient references to confirm when the subject lived or died would indicate that WP:GNG is not met. Certainly no indication that WP:ANYBIO is met.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 02:21, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Jim Kirwan

The article Jim Kirwan has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication that subject meets WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO or WP:VICTIM. Many thousands of people died in the Irish War of Independence. Nothing, with respect, to suggest that this (innocent/civilian?) casualty of that conflict is more notable than any other.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 13:56, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is now an AFD call in relation to this article. PatGallacher (talk) 18:12, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Seán Mór Seoighe for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Seán Mór Seoighe is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seán Mór Seoighe until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

JohnmgKing (talk) 12:10, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of William Anthony Nugent, 13th Earl of Westmeath for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article William Anthony Nugent, 13th Earl of Westmeath is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Anthony Nugent, 13th Earl of Westmeath until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Pilaz (talk) 15:17, 9 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Ultan Conlon for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ultan Conlon is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ultan Conlon until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

UtherSRG (talk) 16:06, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sorrow is the worst thing in life ... for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sorrow is the worst thing in life ... is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sorrow is the worst thing in life ... until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Sgubaldo (talk) 21:50, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Christopher Dillon Bellew

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Christopher Dillon Bellew requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.dib.ie/biography/bellew-christopher-dillon-a0556. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Jfire (talk) 02:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Soraca Jonin for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Soraca Jonin is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Soraca Jonin until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Longhornsg (talk) 06:44, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Mary Staunton for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mary Staunton is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Staunton until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Boleyn (talk) 18:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Patrick Greaney for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Patrick Greaney is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Greaney until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

PigeonChickenFish (talk) 02:33, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tommy Furey

The article Tommy Furey has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No indication of notability

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Sahaib (talk) 16:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of James Connors (Kiltullagh)

The article James Connors (Kiltullagh) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A WP:BEFORE search returns NOTHING to indicate that this victim of violence was any more notable than the dozens (or hundreds) hurt and killed during the Land War in Ireland of the 1880s/1890s. The text itself says "His death was one of many in the [..] area". Nothing to suggest that NVICTIM or NCRIME or BIO1E is met. PRODing as can't see how this could be controversial

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 17:32, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of David Ó Floinn

The article David Ó Floinn has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable clergy member. A WP:BEFORE returns only the single source we have in the article. That source being a directory-style entry of dozens of Irish soldiers/doctors/merchants/priests/lawyers/etc (who happened to be living in France in the 18th century). And which, seemingly contains all that can be said about the subject. Which is that he was a priest who was born (but we can't say where or when) and who lived and died.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 20:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Gerard Madden

The article Gerard Madden has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Boleyn (talk) 09:52, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Nicholas Peacock for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nicholas Peacock is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicholas Peacock until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Guliolopez (talk) 13:51, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Tim Rabbitt for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tim Rabbitt is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tim Rabbitt until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Iveagh Gardens (talk) 09:43, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Michael Bodkin (referee)

The article Michael Bodkin (referee) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Biography of a living person notable for one event. (Someone who might be the same person was later convicted of theft, but the sources don't explicitly state they're the same person, and WP:BLPCRIME must be considered as well.) In any case, no significant coverage in reliable independent sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. -- Tamzin^[cetacean needed] (they|xe) 22:59, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Sinéad Ní Neachtain for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sinéad Ní Neachtain is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sinéad Ní Neachtain until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Allan Nonymous (talk) 14:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Michael Crowe (politician)

The article Michael Crowe (politician) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The individual does not satisfy WP:NPOL or WP:GNG. Being mayor of Galway doesn’t fall under WP:NSUBPOL.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 12:00, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Declan McDonnell for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Declan McDonnell is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Declan McDonnell (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Iveagh Gardens (talk) 13:28, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Diarmuid Ó Cearbhaill

The article Diarmuid Ó Cearbhaill has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Schützenpanzer (Talk) 13:54, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Donnchad Grana Ó Cellaigh

The article Donnchad Grana Ó Cellaigh has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable person. The only source (here or that I can find) barely affords 10 words to the subject. And, at that, refers only to a directory-style (annals) entry which suggests a date of death. Many people (including those with heriditary/traditional/courtesy titles) lived, had children and died. There is nothing to indicate that this subject has any inherent or other form of notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Guliolopez (talk) 15:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Laura Sheeran

The article Laura Sheeran has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. C F A 💬 18:41, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of John Bamlet Smallman for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article John Bamlet Smallman, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Bamlet Smallman until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Walter mac Thomas Bourke

The article Walter mac Thomas Bourke has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The subject of the article would not pass WP:GNG. The subject of the article is a trivial mention in an Irish historical annual, there is no actual information about the person. The article contains no true sources/citations.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.

Also:

• Bernard O'Hara
• Sean Dubh Mac Coisdealbhaigh
• Donn Sléibhe Ua Gadhra

This bot DID NOT nominate any of your contributions for deletion; please refer to the history of each individual page for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 10:00, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Clement the Heretic

The article Clement the Heretic has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Only reference is a passing mention (at best) in a list of abbots, sentence fragment on page 529. But it's not clear the source is even really saying this person existed, or citing 'Clement' as a sample name that doesn't sound Irish

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Here2rewrite (talk) 19:58, 6 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Adrian White (author) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Adrian White (author) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrian White (author) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

— BerryForPerpetuity (talk) 15:17, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Donall an Dúna Mac Cairteáin

The article Donall an Dúna Mac Cairteáin has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability not established with substantive sources. Article was created in 2010.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JoeNMLC (talk) 12:06, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfDs

Hi. The following were nominated by Altenmann:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mícheál Ó Ceallaigh
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seán Ó Catháin
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pádhraic Ó Comáin

Guliolopez (talk) 21:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]