Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hilary Beirne

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 merge‎ to New York City St. Patrick's Day Parade. Less Unless (talk) 13:51, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hilary Beirne[edit]

[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)

While there are some mentions of them, not enough in-depth coverage of them to pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:59, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and New York. Shellwood (talk) 10:41, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Dear Onel5969, permit me to present an alternate vista upon this rich panorama of sources. The array of evidence available, I argue, draws a vivid portrait of our subject that fulfills, if not surpasses, the parameters of WP:SIGCOV.

Reflect, if you will, upon the sheer diversity of contexts in which our subject appears. From being the voice of authority as a parade administrator, to sharing personal insights in a magazine interview, his presence permeates a wide spectrum of discourse.

Furthermore, his inclusion in a political committee carries weight, especially when the announcement of such is is accompanied by a profile and direct quotes - an indication of his significance within the milieu

Similarly, the honoring by the Westchester County board of legislators and the Aisling Irish Community Centre of New York are not mere passing platitudes, but substantive statements describing a community's recognition of his achievements. Such accolades do not find their way to individuals of ordinary standing, but to those who have made substantial impact.

Consider, too, the quality of the sources. The Irish Times, a publication of undisputed credibility, deemed our subject's views valuable enough to include in a discussion of national import. This is not the mark of an individual of passing interest, but rather of one whose insights hold weight.

Esteemed colleague, upon a comprehensive and fair evaluation of the sources at hand, it is my conviction that they provide the 'significant coverage' required by our revered guidelines. The collective breadth, depth, and diversity of these sources underscore the subject's noteworthy influence and contributions in his sphere, thereby affirming his rightful place in the annals of Wikipedia. I propose that the evidence at hand is a testament to our subject's multifaceted significance.

His influence and the recognition he's earned, coupled with the breadth and depth of coverage across a range of reputable sources, come together to advocate strongly for his retention within our compendium. It is my belief that his journey and contributions warrant our attention, and that his tale should remain within Wikipedia's archives, for the edification of all who seek knowledge. Jack4576 (talk) 11:25, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:37, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:GNG. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 13:38, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/redirect to New York City St. Patrick's Day Parade. While Jack4576 has offered a lengthy opinion above, my own review of the sources (in the article and found elsewhere following a WP:BEFORE) indicate that much of the subject's notability relates primarily to his connection with the NYC parade/committee. Otherwise, apart from local/regional sources (like the Roscommon Herald and Sligo Champion pieces) most of the sources are either press releases, interviews, and opinion pieces written by the subject (and therefore not independent). Or are mentions by/about the subject in news pieces which are substantively about something else. A redirect (as an WP:ATD) seems reasonable in this sceanrio... Guliolopez (talk) 13:50, 15 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails GNG, not notable.

Hadal1337 (talk) 16:30, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 09:21, 28 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I don't think his contributions are particularly significant, but that's not what GNG measures. They have gained enough international publicity, in the form of in-depth stories about him in multiple reliably-published and independent newspapers and magazines in Ireland, to pass GNG. And some of them are about one thing and some another (his work with the parade, and with the treaty organization) so WP:BIO1E is not in play. The WP:VAGUEWAVE comments visible above do not convince (although neither does Jack's prolixity on the other side). —David Eppstein (talk) 06:42, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – per the well-argued Spiderone and David Eppstein above. The "Delete" votes do not argue why this fails WP:GNG. —Jonathan Bowen (talk) 21:48, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Leaning more towards a delete/merge per Guliolopez's argument. The case for WP:GNG seems weak.-KH-1 (talk) 01:33, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 04:40, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:05, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Merge any relevant info to New York City St. Patrick's Day Parade. The sources don't indicate general notability outside of this context. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:39, 16 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete – Fails WP:GNG. At most this might warrant a mention at New York City St. Patrick's Day Parade, particularly if that article were to be fleshed out in more detail. – bradv 01:04, 20 June 2023 (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.