Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/O'Rahilly's historical model

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. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:10, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

O'Rahilly's historical model[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)

O'Rahilly's theories may be notable, but this is not the article for it. It simply repeats his theories seemingly like an essay, with little to no encyclopedic content. I think it's time to blow it up and start over, at the very least. I would weakly oppose redirecting to T. F. O'Rahilly as it doesn't seem the title ("O'Rahilly's historical model") has entered scholarly usage outside of Wikipedia, unlikely search term. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 16:02, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Ireland. Shellwood (talk) 17:18, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I lean toward delete. This page has been problematic for a very long time, with no signs of improving. It is not encyclopedic, but repeats a fringe hypothesis as if it's legitimate. I would suggest that the subject be briefly summarized in a section at T. F. O'Rahilly, with sufficient modern-source information to indicate why his model, while once influential, is no longer taken seriously. The hypothesis in and of itself doesn't seem to be separately notable, though if the section grew very large over time (grew in a better way than the article under consideration has grown) then it could WP:SPINOUT again. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 23:03, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:41, 28 September 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.