This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Canada. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.
Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Canada|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Canada.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.
This list is also part of the larger list of deletion debates related to Americas.
Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:
Weak keep. As well as the two obituaries already listed in the article, I added six reviews of two books, making a weak case for WP:AUTHOR (weak because one is an edited volume). I think for an academic of his pre-internet time, that's enough. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:12, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Came across the article on the Christian think tank Cardus today, which appears to be the result of WP:UPE. I stubified that rather than nominate it for deletion because it looks like there's enough out there for WP:ORG. But that led me to this, a long article on one of Cardus's reports, again with no good independent sourcing at all (but a whole lot of text). Wouldn't be surprised if this were UPE too. In any event, if there's a little bit of coverage it can be summarized in the main article. WP:GNG fail here. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 16:22, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Donating money to a university and getting something named after you in return (the Marilyn I Walker School of Fine and Performing Arts at Brock University) is not cause for notability, unless it leads to in-depth independent coverage, and even then it would be only one event. I found one published review of her one book [1] calling it a failure in meeting the purpose of its title, and useless for scholarship, but maybe nice as a coffee table book. Negativity aside, one review of one book isn't enough for WP:AUTHOR.
Note: there is another person with a similar name who meets WP:PROF#C1; we have a separate article on her, Marilyn Walker. I found this discussion via the academics and educators deletion sorting list, but beyond her donation to a university Marilyn I. Walker does not appear to have been an academic. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:48, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment/question - is this a case where a redirect is more appropriate? The Brock University article has a section on the Marilyn I. Walker School of Fine and Performing Arts. Almost all the coverage in newspapers.com talks about the building of the school. I imagine people will look up her name in that context, and a redirect to the section on the Brock University article would be useful. DaffodilOcean (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:GNG, contains a concerning amount of copyvioed material and close paraphrasing, created in draftspace and accepted by a sock. mwwvconverse∫edits 15:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. To be fair, at the time this was created Wikipedia extended an automatic presumption of notability to any television station that could be verifiably shown as having a license from the appropriate regulatory authority regardless of whether any other sourcing could be found besides the licensing documents themselves — but that's since been deprecated, and television stations now have to actually be shown to have WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them. But this has none, and I wasn't able to find anything better on a WP:BEFORE search either — even searching for "Ear Falls TV" just got me hits relating to the Northern Access Network, which wasn't this. (Given the timing, it might have indirectly led to this, in that the end of that might have spawned a "we need a proper community television station" movement that culminated in this, but I can't find any evidence to verify that hunch.) Bearcat (talk) 15:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This has been problematically tagged for over a decade. Seems almost entirely based on self-published primary sources. Has POV issues, and no clear evidence that this is a notable event beyond a news cycle. Wikipedia is not a newspaper or place to post personal interpretations. ZimZalaBimtalk 14:54, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Yves Michaud (politician) (where this is already addressed in a more succinct way). This is notable enough to be covered somewhere in Wikipedia, but it isn't of enough enduring significance to have its own standalone article as a separate topic from the MNA who was implicated in it. Bearcat (talk) 15:00, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NBUILDING and WP:GNG. Long defunct airport, Only "reference" stated is the Nav Canada Wikipedia article, which make no mention of this airport, and is improper as Wikipedia is not a reliable source.
Keep. The 15 March 2007 Canada Flight Supplement mentioned in the article is a valid reference. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 05:45, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The nominator is mistaken about the source. The information is not sourced from, or claimed to be sourced from the Nav Canada Wikipedia article, but rather the Canada Water Aerodrome Supplement. The link to the Wikipedia article is for clarity as the CWAS does not appear to be available online other than for purchase from Nav Canada. - ZLEAT\C 07:06, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect. This is a 2005 article created when Wikipedia was much smaller, articles like this were welcomed, and notability was perhaps a bit looser. However, there was never any ideas as to the fate of abandoned aerodrome articles. Some have been redirected to "List of airports in province", others to List of defunct airports in Canada, and others still remain. The only thing this aerodrome has going for it in terms of notability is that there was a death associated with it. Doesn't really make it notable. As per the others the source is the printed, water, version of the Canada Flight Supplement. I owned copies but haven't bought one in a few years. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 15:16, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. As always, the notability test for actors is not automatically passed just because the article contains a list of roles sourced to IMDb or an IMDb-like directory — it requires passing WP:GNG on reliable source coverage about him and his work in media and/or books, of which there's absolutely none shown here. Bearcat (talk) 15:03, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment from article creator (before we hit this AFD's normal deadline): This is one of several artifacts from the time I focused on Care Bears content (as a fan back then; my kidvid interests have long sinceshifted). Hennessey was the voice of Brave Heart Lion, a Care Bear Cousin. ("Charge!")
As for viable sources, this starting point might not amount to enough, but this is the most in-depth writeup I could find. From here, it's up to the S.S. Cunard (talk·contribs) and others of interest to find a few more out there someplace.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DoczillaOhhhhhh, no! 04:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:29, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete I found only this so far [2]. So, maybe more exist? Otherwise it's WP:LISTCRUFT mixed with WP:OR. Conyo14 (talk) 16:32, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That source appears to be from the CBC, and as such isn't independent. I can't find much else so far. Let'srun (talk) 23:27, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Checked the sources; the first three sources are about the announcers, the one about Canada’s women’s curling team (source 4) are about the team, the other three about the games itself and the last two are WP:PRIMARY. Anything supporting this list is doing nothing for it. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:33, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Before you accuse me of a copy/paste rationale, I have made a WP:BEFORE check. I already debunked the new sources above. SpacedFarmer (talk) 23:26, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: 62 sources have been added since nomination. WP:HEYMAN. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Hey man im josh (talk) 19:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per completely absent significant coverage --BoraVoro (talk) 13:43, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
Guo, Yanxi 郭妍汐; Liu, Jinpeng 刘金鹏 (2016-10-14). "七天•10周年:加拿大七天文化传媒2006-2016" [Sept Days·10th Anniversary: Canadian Sept Days Cultural Media 2006–2016]. People's Daily (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-05-22. Retrieved 2024-05-22.
The article notes: "《七天》报创刊于2006年7月7日。刊头为中英法三语《Sept七天 Days》, 以体现《七天》生活在加拿大多元文化的氛围之中,又由于《七天》是在官方语言为法语的加拿大魁北克省注册,因此法语优先。《七天》报为周报,一周七天,其含义是关注和涵盖生活的每一天。"
From Google Translate: ""Sept Days" newspaper was founded on 7 July 2006. The masthead is "Sept Days" in Chinese, English and French to reflect that "Sept Days" lives in a multicultural atmosphere in Canada. And because "Sept Days" is registered in the Canadian province of Quebec, where the official language is French, French is given priority. "Sept Days" is a weekly newspaper, seven days a week, which means to pay attention to and cover every day of life."
The article notes: "2007年,七天派记者奔赴阿富汗战场,对有加拿大军队参加的这场战争的性质和意义进行了零距离的观察和报道,七天记者胡宪成为海外华文媒体战地记者第一人;"
From Google Translate: "In 2007, Sept Days sent reporters to the battlefield in Afghanistan to conduct close-up observations and reports on the nature and significance of the war involving Canadian troops. Sept Days reporter Hu Xian became the first overseas Chinese-language media war correspondent;"
Cong, Ling 葱岭 (2021-09-06). "加拿大蒙城,一位金融人的华丽变身" [Montreal, Canada, a financial man's gorgeous transformation]. Xinmin Evening News (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-05-22. Retrieved 2024-05-22.
The article notes: "这是一家活跃在加拿大法语城市蒙特利尔的华文媒体,创办16年,累计出版了上千期的中法文报纸杂志和8部书籍。它是第一个向阿富汗派出战地记者的海外华文媒体,也是两次受邀随加拿大总理访华的当地华文媒体。它创办读者俱乐部,举办了几十场各类文化、体育、商务活动,成了当地华人的联系纽带和精神家园。"
From Google Translate: "This is a Chinese-language media active in Montreal, a French-speaking city in Canada. It was founded 16 years ago and has published thousands of issues of Chinese and French newspapers and magazines and 8 books. It is the first overseas Chinese-language media to send war correspondents to Afghanistan, and it is also the local Chinese-language media twice invited to visit China with the Canadian Prime Minister. It established readers’ clubs and held dozens of cultural, sports, and business activities of various types, becoming a link and spiritual home for local Chinese."
The article notes: "2006年,尹灵再次辞职,创办华文报纸《七天》。那年,她40岁。"
From Google Translate: "In 2006, Yin Ling resigned again and founded the Chinese newspaper "Sept Days". That year, she was 40 years old."
The article notes: "《七天》从一开始就摒弃了很多海外中文报纸翻译本地新闻、复制粘贴的做法,坚持自己采访、自己撰稿,一下子吸引了大批读者。"
From Google Translate: "From the beginning, "Sept Days" abandoned many overseas Chinese newspapers' practices of translating local news and copying and pasting. It insisted on doing its own interviews and writing its own articles, and it suddenly attracted a large number of readers."
The article notes: "蒙特利尔华文媒体《七天》传媒10月28日晚在当地举行晚宴,庆祝该报创立10周年。该报新创办的法文报纸《La Connexion》也正式发布。加拿大总理多为《七天》10周年庆祝活动发来贺信。特鲁多说,值此《七天》传媒10周年之际,"
From Google Translate: "Montreal Chinese-language media "Sept Days" held a dinner locally on the evening of October 28 to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the newspaper's founding. The newspaper's new French-language newspaper "La Connexion" was also officially launched. The Prime Minister of Canada has sent congratulatory messages to celebrate the 10th anniversary of "Sept Days". Trudeau said that on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of "Sept Days" media,"
Li, Dan 李丹 (2016-11-10). "加拿大七天传媒成立十周年庆典在蒙特利尔举行" [The 10th anniversary celebration of Sept Days in Canada was held in Montreal]. 美中时报 [Sino-US Times] (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 2024-05-22. Retrieved 2024-05-22.
The article notes: "《七天》是世界各国领导人访问加拿大时的必邀华文媒体。中国国务院总理李克强在2016年9月23日访问加拿大时,亦特邀《七天》参与了华文媒体座谈会。"
From Google Translate: ""Sept Days" is the Chinese-language media that must be invited when world leaders visit Canada. When Chinese Premier Li Keqiang visited Canada on September 23, 2016, he specially invited "Seven Days" to participate in a Chinese media symposium."
The article notes: "Sept Days competes with five other Chinese newspapers in a market of no more than 100,000 potential readers. Its three full-time journalists and five freelancers focus on a mix of local, international and entertainment news. Ten thousand copies are printed of each issue and, according to Yin, 50,000 people read the paper each week. The paper is free of charge, and advertising and investments from the paper's board of directors keep it afloat, but Yin admits that it has yet to break even. Sending Hu to Afghanistan was an unusual step for an ethnic newspaper, but it has earned Sept Days a certain notoriety in the Chinese community. Last month, the paper sponsored a lecture by Hu on her experience in Kabul, and this month, it will send another reporter overseas to cover the presidential election in Taiwan."
The article notes: "Conservative Sen. Victor Oh was in Montreal earlier this month to drum up enthusiasm for Saturday’s rally on the Hill. His visit was covered by Sept Days, a Montreal Chinese-language publisher with links to the Chinese Community Party. Sept Days was among a handful of Canadian organizations that attended the Chinese government’s United Front Work Department media forum training in 2019, according to a recent report by Alliance Canada Hong Kong."
The article notes: "由加拿大七天传媒出版社出版的《加拿大华人精英录》一书于当地时间6月22日晚在蒙特利尔首发,正式与读者见面。"
From Google Translate: "The book "Canadian Chinese Elites" published by Canada's Seven Days Media Publishing House was first launched in Montreal on the evening of June 22, local time, and officially met with readers."
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: to allow time to assess identified sources Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, StarMississippi 02:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
and I have also semi'ed it to stop the disruption. I don't involve a relist as Involved, but if someone else does feel free to revisit StarMississippi 03:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article about a musician, not reliably sourced as passing WP:NMUSIC. The only properly verifiable claim of notability here is that he existed -- it asserts that he had hit singles, but fails to provide any verification of where they were "hits" (spoiler alert, not in RPM). And for "referencing", it just contextlessly bulletpoints a list of mostly primary source websites that aren't support for notability, without footnoting anything in the article body to any of them. On a WP:BEFORE search, further, I didn't find enough coverage to salvage this -- apart from one concert review in The Globe and Mail on the occasion of him playing the El Mocambo in 1980, I otherwise only get local coverage in Saskatoon, glancing namechecks of his existence in sources that aren't about him in any sense, and tangential hits for other unrelated Brian Plummers (such as Bill Pullman's character in The Equalizer). Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have more and better sourcing than he has. Bearcat (talk) 19:15, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: it looks very much as though this was written as a WP:NOTMEMORIAL... the only other edit the article creator has made to Wikipedia is to add some information about Jack Hazebroek to the article about the Rolling Stones Mobile Studio, and Hazebroek's name also appears in this article, so I imagine it was written as a tribute to Mr. Plummer, having worked with him. Richard3120 (talk) 20:03, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, StarMississippi 02:57, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
All written by the same user that have also been deleted for the same reasons, this similarly written article has the same problems. WP:SYNTH + WP:REFBOMBED issues where the article just references random articles with the phrase "Arab Canadian" or "Arab-Canadian (identity)" in it. NLeeuw (talk) 08:24, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 05:13, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: More than enough study of this cultural identity [3], [4] and multiple papers such as [5], [6]. This is also a book review on the subject [7]. Oaktree b (talk) 15:15, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Arab Canadians, which doesn't have a lot of prose; this content could improve the parent article. --Metropolitan90(talk) 02:40, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header. Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online 17:42, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and Procedural Close, as no deletion argument has been presented. The article certainly needs to be rewritten to remove POV issues, but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP and the references in the article already present the subject's notability. SilverserenC 01:11, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Deletion is requested based on dated news articles, no more relevant. 1nicknamesb (talk) 16:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Being sourced to older articles is not a basis for deletion alone, but only [8] appears to be significant coverage of the organization itself so I don't think it passes WP:NORG. The sources seem to be news (WP:NOTNEWS) about an injured dog and imported pets or routine coverage of a small local organization. Reywas92Talk 17:21, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Here's significant coverage of the group covering years that I found in multiple different publications, Reywas92.
These sources cover the history of the group, how it formed, and its activities over the years, both good and bad. SilverserenC 20:53, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Silverseren's evidence, most of his sources are inaccessible but I am assuming good faith (ping me if it turns out these sources don't establish notability). Article is in a poor state but can be fixed and I've already removed nonsense like the Google Reviews from the article. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen×☎ 05:24, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Article was unsourced, and still requires some cleanup and improvement, however the subject is notable under GNG and WP:NMUSIC, particularly criteria 1 and 9. I added a few sources found quickly from a google search. A deeper search may reveal more. Bgv. (talk) 23:11, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A competition is only "major" enough to fulfill NMUSIC #9 if it gets WP:GNG-worthy media coverage that reports its winners as news, and is not "major" enough to pass that criterion if you have to rely on its own self-published press releases because third-party coverage treating it as newsworthy is non-existent. So he hasn't been shown to pass #9 at all, and with only one real media source about him he has not yet been shown to pass #1 either. Bearcat (talk) 15:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad to see one article that may satisfy the WP:GNG criterion, however, we'd need more sustained coverage in order for it to actually pass WP:GNG. Allan Nonymous (talk) 16:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
With respect to the concern of competitions not being major, I only now noticed that the citation in the article is to the subject's self-published website, however the wins have been confirmed by other sources (e.g. [9], [10]). I'll digress that the competitions cited are not "major" enough to have their winners make the mainstream news, however the status of winning of (specifically) the Stepping Stone Competition has been cited by mainstream news sources in their determination of endorsements for young musicians (e.g. [11], [12], and less significant coverage [13]). Focusing more heavily on NMUSIC #1 and the GNG, please see 1 and 2 above, along with this news article, and this inclusion of his biography backing the claims of notability from the Quebec Contemporary Music Society. For what it's worth, his discography was aired on the radio, as demonstrated here, and here. I will plug a few of these into the article, hopefully by the time anyone is reading this. Bgv. (talk) 01:44, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article says absolutely nothing about the subject besides its name. There is no reason for this article to exist separately from Naval Large Tugboat. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:16, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:21, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article says absolutely nothing about the subject besides identifying its namesake. There is no reason for this article to exist separately from Naval Large Tugboat. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 01:16, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO. Sources are user-generated, primary sources or trivial coverage (the phone book??). BEFORE search turns up no other evidence of notability as an artist or generally. Dclemens1971 (talk) 00:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Very trivial coverage found [14]. No listing in the Getty ULAN [15], the artist hasn't gained critical recognition, with no sourcing in Gscholar found... The person existed, but that's not what we're looking for in a notability guideline. Oaktree b (talk) 04:21, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY. I added three RS to the article. While cleaning up, I deleted all the unsourced and unnecessary material, and re-formatted two references. I think the article should be kept largely due to Ryshpan's regular exhibitions at the Montreal of Museum of Fine Arts, and his entry in A Dictionary of Canadian Artists. There is also non-trivial coverage of his 1958 retrospective. It passes WP:GNG with at least two reliable sources. Curiocurio (talk) 14:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The article is definitely improved and I thank you for taking that on! but I question the use of MacDonald's dictionary to validate notability. It doesn't appear to be selective but rather inclusive of any artist (the volume Ryshpan is listed is just Canadian artists with last names R-S, that single volume is over 500 pages long, and Ryshpan warrants a single paragraph). Meanwhile, the Montreal Museum of Fine Arts exhibitions were not selective nor were they exclusive to Ryshpan. The spring exhibition was for many decades an exhibition open to all artists and often included 400-500 works (see page 2 of the source you provided). That leaves a short reference in Ayre's art column, and I frankly disagree that this is enough. Dclemens1971 (talk) 15:44, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The main point is that three reliable sources are enough to get over WP:GNG, not WP:NARTIST. Curiocurio (talk) 16:07, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Right, the question is whether a phone-book-length non-selective directory and an exhibition summary for a non-selective, open-to-all art exhibition constitute "significant coverage" for GNG. I'm skeptical. Dclemens1971 (talk) 17:04, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A Dictionary of Canadian Artists has been completed by the National Gallery of Canada, so it's hardly just a directory. Curiocurio (talk) 17:11, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 00:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:HEY - This Montreal painter and engraver has an artistic background that deserves to be known. This biographical summary is well referenced.Veillg1 (talk) 15:13, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Does the article clean up and new sources added since its nomination change anyone's opinion about notability here? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:27, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Source 5 is about artworks displayed in a library, I'm still not sure that meets notability requirements. The Canadian artist dictionary is fine, but it's still a small mention. Oaktree b (talk) 23:51, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98(Talk) 02:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 03:45, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 02:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98(Talk) 02:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unable to find more than some trivial mentions, and as such, this subject does not meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV. Please ping me if significant coverage is found. Let'srun (talk) 14:09, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 02:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 02:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NSKATE; medal placement at the junior level or bronze/silver medals at the senior-level national championships explicitly do not meet the requirements of WP:NSKATE. PROD removed. Bgsu98(Talk) 02:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unable to find more than some trivial mentions, this fails to meet the WP:GNG due to a seeming lack of WP:SIGCOV. Please ping me if significant coverage is found. Let'srun (talk) 14:05, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 02:11, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 02:34, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Article is completely unsourced and subject does not seem to be notable. Quick Google News skim shows only two vague news articles about this Foundation [19][20]. GoldRomean (talk) 22:24, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - written at a time when sources were helpful but not always neccesary. No evidence of notability in the current climate. Fails WP:GNG. VelellaVelella Talk 22:33, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. Please assess recent changes to the article. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"subject does not seem to be notable...." Except to the worldwide community of those who collect, study, and research postal history and postage stamps. 2601:282:1C00:8A10:9146:9250:A151:B8D9 (talk) 18:49, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regretably that is not sufficient to meet WP:GNG. Notability has a very specific meaning on Wikipedia and that is the criteria that must be met. Popularity with philatelists is of interest, but does not contribute to notability unless this particular subject is discussed in multiple independent and reliable sources. VelellaVelella Talk 21:57, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:03, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Canadian auction house Sparks calls Greene "the pre-eminent expert committee for the stamps of Canada and British North America." That's probably not a reliable source, but it ought to be a hint that there's something there. Indeed, there's coverage in philatelic periodicals. Appropriately for a Canada-centric topic, Canada Stamp News has spent a lot of time talking about Greene: [21][22][23][24][25] and so forth. I suspect a great deal of discussion in Linn's and Gibbon Stamp Monthly, but both of them have paywalled archives (and the former's archive is a sad "archive", going back to ~2008 for a publication that debuted in 1928!). Digitization rates for reference material in this field are terrible; a lot of the significant coverage here is going to be in print. Lubal (talk) 16:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:NPOL as a former candidate who got exactly 0 votes. Since her 2021 run, she did absolutely nothing that is notable, so I'm renominating this article for deletion. All the sources fit squarely in WP:BLP1E territory. Mottezen (talk) 04:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Not passing WP:NPOL does not mean that she cannot be notable through any other criteria. The previous AfD from 2021 was kept on WP:GNG grounds; can you clarify why you think that result was incorrect? Curbon7 (talk) 05:09, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the previous nomination, the 2021 United Nations Secretary-General selection was not yet completed. While, most !keep voters in the previous AfD did not even acknowledge the BLP1E issue, those that did exaggerated her importance in the election.
Example for exaggerated importance: even if the coverage relates to one event (where both the event & the role of the subject is significant); such articles are usually kept. and Invoking WP:BLP1E here isn't right because she pretty clearly has a significant role in the selection. Remember, she got no votes and no country endorsements, so her role in the event was insignificant. Even the UN ambassador for her own country didn't reply to her request for a meeting to discuss her candidacy.
Of note: about a year after the end of her campaign, her campaign website https://unow.org/ went down, and her last campaign post on facebook was before the 2021 selection. Arora moved on to become a lecturer. Mottezen (talk) 05:45, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - as in the first AfD, I think the question of notability centers on WP:BLP1E, since WP:GNG is clearly met. BLP1E states that we should not have an article if all 3 conditions are met. Here, Criteria #1 and #2 are clearly met (only covered in context of one event, otherwise low-profile). So is Criteria #3 met? Well, the UN Secretary-General selection is clearly significant, so that's ok. Was Arora's role "not substantial" or "not well-documented"? As GNG is met, we can cross off "not well-documented." On "not substantial", we come to a matter of opinion. Since she received no backing or actual votes, I can see why those in favor of deletion would argue her role was insubstantial. On the other hand, this candidacy was outside the norms of the UN system and attracted reliable media coverage for that reason. I would argue it was substantial enough to merit her inclusion as a standalone page. However, a merge to 2021 United Nations Secretary-General selection would also be a reasonable outcome. —Ganesha811 (talk) 13:30, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to 2021 United Nations Secretary-General selection. Not convinced there's enough here for WP:GNG.-KH-1 (talk) 02:40, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a BLP1E similar to an article about a losing candidate - if there's anything to cover, it can be done on the election page. SportingFlyerT·C 04:22, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. As Ganesha811 points out, with the amount of coverage received this is not a case of Arora being "not well-documented". I see WP:GNG met in this case, and losses can be notable if covered in reliable secondary sources. Hydrangeans (she/her | talk | edits) 08:38, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: To those who argue her run for Secretary-general is "well-documented"... it's just not, especially in the crucial stages of her campaign. Let me illustrate: these are the dates the 9 secondary sources in the article were published:
AFP (February 19, 2021)
Arab News (April 4, 2021)
NYT (February 26, 2021)
Hindustan Times (February 27, 2021)
Business Today (March 2, 2021)
The Print (February 13, 2021)
CBC (April 4, 2021)
Forbes (May 7, 2021)
New Yorker (June 14, 2021)
Note that there is only one source published in June 2021, the month the vote took place, and thus the month that attention to the UNSG selection was most warranted. Sadly, the most crucial period of her campaign is barely documented. The June New Yorker source is also one of the lesser quality sources because it merely recounts a day the author spent with her; it's storytelling rather than journalistic work. Mottezen (talk) 05:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree. Again, our standard is to delete or merge articles on unsuccessful candidates for political office. This was kept at the first AfD likely erroneously because those arguing for keep either met GNG was met (which is irrelevant for candidates, who always meet GNG - political candidates are exceptions to GNG under NOT) and that her run was significant for purposes of BLP1E (she ended up not even being eligible to run.) She's also not otherwise notable. SportingFlyerT·C 06:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting. There are widely diverging opinions/arguments in this discussion on whether or not this subject meets Wikipedia's standards of notability. Editors who are proposing a Merge/Redirect outcome must provide a link to the target article they are proposing. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 05:17, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, DoczillaOhhhhhh, no! 19:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as BLP1E. Apart from some glowing PR pieces, her self-declared candidacy for UN Secretary-General was irrelevant to that event. (She says her campaign was "non-traditional" to try to explain away that she got no nominations and no votes.) And there is no substantial coverage about her outside of that. Walsh90210 (talk) 20:37, 20 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fails WP:GNG. Unlikely to become notable, if the team is defunct. Unsourced (though I know that's probably fixable). Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:29, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The team easily passes GNG due to substantial news coverage in Nova Scotia and the Maritimes. Here are a few of the more recent news on the team. [26][27][28][29][30] I question whether the nominator completed WP:BEFORE on this nomination. I'm baffled what is meant by "Unlikely to become notable, if the team is defunct". As per WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP, the article might be poorly sourced in its current state, but can easily be improved. Flibirigit (talk) 12:23, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did indeed complete a before search. I found numerous news articles regarding the move of the team, all based on press releases. I found routine coverage, e.g. of matches. I found articles based on what a spokesperson for the team said, without WP:SECONDARY analysis. I found nothing that was WP:INDEPTH, WP:SECONDARY, WP:INDEPENDENT to satisfy GNG. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 15:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, StarMississippi 01:46, 4 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting, I'd like to see a review of newly found sources to see if GNG is met. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 02:25, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Agreeing with Liz here, we also need clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rusty4321talkcontribs 14:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unfortunate accusations against the nominator aside, there's nothing approaching significant coverage applied, linked above, or found during my reasonable BEFORE which renders this subject sufficiently notable for its own article. I see no evidence this can be improved. BusterD (talk) 14:02, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@BusterD: There was no intent to accuse anyone of anything. My only intent was to convey that I felt a BEFORE was not done. We simply disagree on the sources. I have nothing personal against @Curb Safe Charmer:. Best wishes and happy editing. Flibirigit (talk) 15:55, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Flibirigit: And that language would have been more appropriate to a civil disagreement, like AfD. "I-messages" are helpful because they're not so threatening. We must be able to argue freely, even sometimes beyond the bounds of reasonableness. Sometimes screaming is quite necessary. Give yourself permission to step over the line occasionally, if in doing so you might push our entire Wikipedia movement forward. IMHO, that's the heart of WP:IAR. I am proud to participate in a process in which civil disagreement makes us a stronger (and more cohesive) community. Nice to meet you. BusterD (talk) 16:05, 19 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]