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. ffm 18:08, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

John Donoghue[edit]

John Donoghue (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article has been tagged for having no sources since October 2006. There is no evidence of this person's existence outside this article and its claims for his notability are limited. Note there was a previous AfD for a different John Donoghue, which led to a redirect. Grahame (talk) 12:43, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 12:43, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, a quick search in a couple of book catalogues turned up nothing at all. The story sounds plausible enough, but given that it appears unverifiable, it has to go. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 11:19, 13 October 2008 (UTC).[reply]
• Delete Article fails to demonstrate a source for even one of the claims it makes. It has been tagged for no references since 2006 and nothing has been forthcoming. It is the responsibility of the contributors to supply references and citations. It looks like either original research or a hoax. Dolphin51 (talk) 10:37, 14 October 2008 (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.