Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Àdhamh Ó Broin

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 soft delete. WP:REFUND applies. Sandstein 20:24, 22 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Àdhamh_Ó_Broin

[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)

An obvious delete ~~per WP:SNOW~~. There is nothing that even hints at notability, no mention in any notable sources, absolutely nothing. Yes, this individual is a genuinely nice person, he has won a little known award (I know it, but no RS-sources for the award either and winning it does not make one notable), and has done consulting for a TV-series. That is very far from WP notability. By the same standard, any person who has ever won any award or worked for any company or pretty much done anything should have an article. This is about as far from notability I've ever come across on Wikipedia (joke articles aside). I suggest a ~~speedy~~ delete ~~as per SNOW~~ Jeppiz (talk) 00:51, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Respectfully, this isn't a SNOW deletion. I'm wondering if you checked Google News before nominating. There is some coverage of his role in Outlander[1][2][3][4] which is probably the only thing making him notable. I won't be voting either way because I think it's borderline in terms of GNG. It's fair to say that I created the article when I was new to Wikipedia and probably would not do so again. Catrìona (talk) 01:10, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I agree SNOW does not apply based on these sources (not mentioned in the article), but still hold it should not be on Wikipedia as I don't think it qualifies as significant coverage as it more or less comes down to one event (coaching actors in Outlander). I'm sure we agree he is not an academic, so would probably fall under 'creative professionals'. I cannot see how any of the four criteria under WP:CREATIVE are met here. Closest would be created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work but even that is rather far, as dialect coaching is hardly to create or play a major role in creating a tv-series. Jeppiz (talk) 01:24, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: (1) He seems an interesting person, much more so than dozens of models ("supermodels"), "reality TV" participants, etc. But that's merely my point of view. Jeppiz, you seem rather worked up about him. (2) Somebody nominates an article for deletion. If it soon thereafter becomes clear from the number and (near-) unanimity of others' comments that the article has no chance of survival (or deletion), then the AFD may be cut short. Very odd for a nominator to say, in effect, "Please discuss the fate of this article [AFD] by cutting short the discussion!" -- Hoary (talk) 01:55, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reading WP:ADHOM might be good idea, Hoary. Apart from being irrelevant to the discussion, the personal comments about me are entirely wrong. I'm not in the least worked about Àdhamh. Quite the contrary, he's a nice guy with whom I've spoken several times. I have a lot of respect for what he's doing, I support him, and I wish him well. It's just that being a nice person isn't a criteria for notability, not even being an interesting person. As I already pointed out, he does not meet our general criteria for being notable, and that is the one and only reason I recommended the article be deleted. Regardless of this discussion, I will continue to follow the work of Àdhamh myself, but that's quite beside the point. Jeppiz (talk) 16:39, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:24, 30 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, wumbolo ^^^ 21:21, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:40, 14 October 2018 (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.