Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cainnear (name)

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. Aoidh (talk) 02:41, 14 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Cainnear (name)

[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)

Set index with only one article. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:43, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:21, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This article has lots of appropriate references from a variety of sources and uses reputable sources also. How might I improve it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robert444444 (talk • contribs) 12:10, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: The name itself has some religious, spiritual, historical, and national (Irish) merits as for it to be associated with Irish people, Catholicism, and Irish history in general. However, I am curious to see what fellow editors think of its notability as all sources out there that I am aware of are passing mentions.AmshitBalcon (talk) 23:32, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone 01:52, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - a name which could have a small article, and a list function, but clearly does need some work. SeoR (talk) 20:23, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~Comment~~. If this title is kept, its content needs to be completely culled and a very simply stub retained. Almost none of the links (I dare not call them references to be honest) support the text in the manner they are used. Frankly I'm having a hard time seeing passed that mess to offer a reasoned !vote recommendation. (I also note that the Conaire (saint) article already contains a "list of saints named Cainder/Cainnear/etc"; And so I have CFORK/redundancy concerns...) Guliolopez (talk) 02:45, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Having spent a chunk of time (and then some) reviewing, fixing and updating the sources/text, it seems that GNG may be met. And, while some content and CFORK issues remain, there probably is a case to be made for retention. Guliolopez (talk) 05:33, 25 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:11, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles (talk) 16:52, 6 April 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.