Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eimar O'Duffy

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. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 23:01, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that this nomination also met the guidelines for speedy keep as it was nominated by a sockpuppet of a banned editor. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 23:03, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eimar O'Duffy

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

Delete - This article is not notable to be added on Wikipedia. AdamSmithUS (talk) 15:21, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 16:53, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 16:53, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Subject appears to have been a fairly prominent author in his time. Article in its current state is very poor, but subject seems very viable for inclusion. Here is one book devoted entirely to the subject's works, and this Gbooks search reveals a lot of authors writing about the subject once you go to Page 2. Everything on Page 1 is the subject's own works. Appears to be fairly heavily-cited on Google Scholar as well. Keep per the relevant notability guideline. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 18:26, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and improve: The article certainly needs work but the subject's notability is hardly in doubt. See his Ricorso entry and material scooped up by a routine internet search. (Note: The proposer is a highly inexperienced editor who joined Wikipedia three days ago and who, at time of writing, has performed a staggering total of 29 edits since then.) — O'Dea (talk) 19:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the subject is notable but article definitely needs improvement. Snappy (talk) 17:09, 30 August 2013 (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.