Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shae Invidiata

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. The first two "keep" opinions are not policy-based. Sandstein 19:12, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shae Invidiata[edit]

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

Fails notability criteria of WP:BIO. Local activist, founder of a non-notable organization, source coverage is strictly local and/or only contains minor mentions of the article subject. Kelly ^hi! 16:40, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:48, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jbh ^Talk 22:23, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep: Founding organizations to stop human trafficking is a notable accomplishment, I think the article is of poor quality and needs expansion, but I'd like to se someone step in and upgrade it. Montanabw^(talk) 23:07, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- How does founding an organisation for a cause you like confer notability? Without sources, how do we know it isn't three people in a basement? The Drover's Wife (talk) 17:08, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This is some seriously weak stuff: to try to justify an article on her, it has a sentence about an event she merely attended (that then names a bunch of other people who also attended), a listing from one random magazine, a quote in a local paper, and a note that she attempted (not even succeeded) to partner with her local police on a pet project. This not only fails WP:BIO, it does it spectacularly. The Drover's Wife (talk) 02:40, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge to Human trafficking in Canada. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 14:36, 15 November 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor ^Talk! 02:16, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, local sources don't detract from notability. WP:GNG doesn't even address local coverage. It's not a reason to delete if coverage is local. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 15:41, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Their being local doesn't even address the WP:BIO or WP:GNG issues here. Where is the coverage of her, specifically, period? You could write an article on me that would have far more trouble with GNG than this and I am utterly unnotable. The Drover's Wife (talk) 17:18, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm just making a point, The Drover's Wife: local coverage does not negate GNG. It's just not a reason for deletion. I commented here above because the nominator uses that argument. I'm not voting on this, just passing through and making sure the arguments are on topic since I see this mistake made a lot. Megalibrarygirl (talk) 18:44, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 20:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Plenty of provincial media coverage. National or international media coverage not needed for notablity, as that would remove e.g. almost every high school from wikipedia. Martinogk (talk) 08:50, 26 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Straight advocacy, and not separately notable from the organization. It might be possible to have a npov article on the organization, because that's what the refs are mainly about. DGG ( talk ) 06:26, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I simply found some links at News and browsers....nothing compelling enough for a solid and notable article but feel welcome to redirect where ever necessary. SwisterTwister talk 06:31, 30 November 2015 (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.