Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick O'Shea

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 no consensus. Of note is that sources were added to the article after the nomination for deletion, so it's no longer an unreferenced article. After two relistings, no consensus for a particular action has arisen herein. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:57, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rick O'Shea

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

Entirely un-referenced article about a living person of questionable notability. Mikeblas (talk) 14:14, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:56, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2016 May 29. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:21, 29 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 21:05, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 21:08, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Added sources that indicate ongoing coverage in national media and indeed notability. I will of course admit that there is a lot of cruft that needs to be weeded from the article. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 22:48, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 01:54, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Remove from mainspace and Draft instead at best, and I noticed News has several pages of links, which could be consulted and see if there's enough minimally better but the current article is certainly acceptable and is thus best removed from mainspace if anyone is willing to improve it.... instead of keeping it here and simply hoping for improvements. SwisterTwister talk 23:38, 10 June 2016 (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.