Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Denis O'Conor Don

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. Mojo Hand (talk) 00:31, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Denis O'Conor Don

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I can't see anything here meeting WP:BIO. His descent from a High King doesn't get him there, per WP:BIORELATED, and I don't see that his involvement in the Council of Chieftains assists either. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 15:57, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, Ireland, and United Kingdom. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:15, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
He did get an obituary in The Irish Times. I’m not sure there’s enough here for him to satisfy notability though. –Iveagh Gardens (talk) 14:47, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Obit not withstanding, which is more, at this level, about who you know than what you did, the alarm words are "seen by some" and "defunct title". This is no disrespect to the man, who died in July 2000 after an admirable life and achievements, RIP, but wiki might not be best place for commemoration. Ceoil (talk) 23:22, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's probably true that obituaries depend to some degree on "who you know than what you did" but that in and of itself doesn't have a bearing on Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. We have plenty of articles about people who did not do anything particular interesting except being very grand, but that doesn't disqualify them from inclusion if notability is established. Atchom (talk) 18:58, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I almost voted deleted per nom, but after a search I came up with a very long (half-page, with two pictures) Daily Telegraph obituary (21 July 2000, p. 31) which goes into some detail about his life. Having two full-length obituaries in two major newspapers of two different countries clearly meets the notability criteria. The relevant criteria is whether he has received significant coverage from several secondary sources, not whether we think his life is interesting enough to be included. Atchom (talk) 18:06, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw nomination While the article is in need of revision, with two obituaries in different jurisdictions, he has reached notability. I had only found one myself, and would agree with Ceoil's assessment that in some cases, getting an obituary can depend on who you know, so that one obituary shouldn't in itself qualify. That said, the article remains in need of considerable revision, as Liz noted. -Iveagh Gardens (talk) 20:57, 17 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[As noted by Ljleppan, I closed this nomination prematurely, not taking Ceoil's vote into account, so I'm reinstating it here. Iveagh Gardens (talk) 11:01, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep I feel a bit iffy every time the WP:NBASIC requirement for "multiple" is reached with exactly two sources, especially given that they are both obituaries. "Weak", as it's a bit borderline in my view, but the length of the obits pushes it to the "keep" side for me. -Ljleppan (talk) 13:24, 18 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.