Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michelle Leclaire O'Neill

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 delete. ✗plicit 23:52, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle Leclaire O'Neill

[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)

I removed all the unsourced nonsense (or poorly sourced) and we're left with...not much. But even digging deep into this, I don't know who or what credible organizations recognize her as an expert, but, well, an expert she is not.

This is a lot of...quackery to say the least and not even recognized well in the communities that believe in hypnobirthing etc... CUPIDICAE💕 17:30, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete this unreferenced BLP. I can only find passing mentions of her, not significant coverage. Cullen328 (talk) 17:53, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Women. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 17:59, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as unreferenced BLP. Not much to go on here. Tony Fox (arf!) 18:23, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep It seems, based on three sources, that she invented the concept of hypnobirthing.

WP:CREATIVE criterion 2 says authors, editors and others who invent a significant new concept are notable. CT55555 (talk) 23:06, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete This article is bald and bereft of content that indicates notability. It does not even meet
WP:BEFORE (books) returns a number of titles on hypnotherapy and Michelle Leclarie O'Neill; however, it is not our task to backfill articles bereft of content. This is a BLP, has to meet BLP specifications. --Whiteguru (talk) 07:53, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete The cleveland.com article actually states that it is not clear who coined this word, "But no matter who originated the word ...". And hypnobirthing does not have its own article, merely a brief mention in hypnotherapy, so it is probably not a "significant new concept" in any event. Edwardx (talk) 20:21, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete our sources do not add up to notability. Basically I endorse Edwardx's assessment of the situation.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:28, 18 April 2022 (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.