Deletion of Aedan McGrath

Comment: easily passes , as a Google Books search indicates. Both the nomination and the delete !vote above appear to rely on the sources cited in the article, but they are much more plentiful than that.  has simply not been followed. See, for example, https://books.google.com/books?id=Sx1oAfEuB-AC&pg=PT116 half a page on the account of his arrest in a book published by A&C Black. As far as obituaries go, the one cited in the article is indeed commonplace: the ''Irish Times'' followed it up three days later with a http://www.irishtimes.com/news/priest-jailed-by-chinese-for-three-years-1.1123075 much more comprehensive one. Please do your own searches, people
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BEFORE)

Comment: per nom. Notability unclear or unestablished in current content. The main sources are (respectfully) relatively commonplace obituaries, and do not exceed what might be expected to surpass . To meet  we might expect to see a body of work that has been subject to independent review/coverage. And, while not formal guideline, to meet  we might expect to see broader coverage of related works. In general I'm not seeing how  and  are met. UPDATED: {{u|StAnselm}} highlights that various other book sources (not mentioned in the current article) indicate SIGCOV. However, from what I can see, this coverage primarily relates to the subject's imprisonment. While some of that coverage is non-trivial, to my own eye, it doesn't surpass that required to surpass  and 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTMEMORIAL||WP:AUTHOR||WP:RELPEOPLE||WP:GNG||WP:ANYBIO||WP:BIO1E||WP:VICTIM)