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. Sandstein 07:55, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Patrick J. O'Rahilly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Insufficient sourcing, unsubstantiated claims, severely out-of-date due to minimal interest with little or no updates for a substantial number of years. Bludpuppy (talk) 23:31, 19 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:46, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:46, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bludpuppy, just out of curiosity, why did you make so many edits to this article, then nominate it for deletion after the notability tag was added? - PabloMartinez (talk) 14:11, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PabloMartinez Thank you for contacting me and for your edits. I am new to Wikipedia and am overwhelmed by it's detailed usage. If I could I would delete all of my edits and contributions as I see they made quite a mess, and rescind the nomination. Wikipedia said "Be bold" and congratulated me on my first edit and after 10 said "keep going"(wasn't aware they would all be saved as revisions). I had read that notability was a reason for deletion or adding to another article and was similar to nomination. Again playing with buttons I have no knowledge of. I have a great deal of respect for Mr. O'Rahilly and felt that I had ruined his article and maybe this would let users give him a fresh start. I have no desire to ever edit this or anyone else's page again. I thought that by getting a consensus to delete that a new article could be clean start, again a naive thought of how Wikipedia works. I apologize to the Wikipedia community and to anyone that was offended by my recklessness. Wikipedia will be a "read only" for me from now on. Thanks again. Bludpuppy —Preceding undated comment added 15:54, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response, Bludpuppy. No need to be overwhelmed, but if the person the article about is notable, I would question whether it should be deleted, or just cleaned up. Perhaps others can weigh in. - PabloMartinez (talk) 20:27, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bludpuppy NOT necessarily wanting this article deleted if it could be cleaned up like Pablomartinez is suggesting including a deletion of all of the recent edit revisions (who can do that?). Might be nice to add a photo. I worked with Pat years ago and he was always the consummate professional with a mind for business. I have a considerable amount of Pat's personal and business info that I could share, keeping the subject matter to what I know he would approve of. Maybe someone with good writing skills could interpret into a properly structured piece. I have a serious neurological disability and have a tough time typing without constantly making errors/revisions but I could provide details. So either way I'm sure we could come up with a better quality article and at the same time improve Wikipedia. Thanks. Bludpuppy comment added by top|talk]]) 22:57, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(non voter reply)::to Bludpuppy, You are not supposed to edit articles about people you worked with since you are too close to the subject (unless you remain neutral and seeing by your words it appears not). Plus the article on Patrick must be neutral, even if that makes him unhappy. Please read conflict of interest guidelines on this site. JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 00:01, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

JC7V7DC5768 Thanks for the info. I can remain neutral and stick to the facts. I will take any edits suggested to heart and adhere to the guidelines. Thanks again. (Bludpuppy) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bludpuppy (talk • contribs) 00:34, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[JC7V7DC5768] After extensive reading on the subject I see your point and Wikipedias logic behind it. It's best I don't contribute anything. (Bludpuppy) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bludpuppy (talk • contribs) 06:55, 21 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete local coverage and non-notable awards, but nothing that adds up to actual notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:22, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete-UPE + No notability.Huh!∯WBG^converse 12:47, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

- Not at Aspen anymore. Heard he retired.Bludpuppy (talk) 22:16, 26 July 2018 (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.