Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Canadian tribunals

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 keep. (non-admin closure) —MRD2014 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of Canadian tribunals[edit]

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

No indication of context or notability. Zackmann08 (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:16, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:CLN. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 16:09, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep This was punted to AFD after I removed an inappropriate Speedy A1 request. The context is obvious: it's a list of Canadian tribunals. As for notability, it clearly passes WP:LISTN. See the Canadian Encyclopedia entry on tribunals http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/administrative-tribunals/ or the Ontario Council of Agencies Serving Immigrants webpage http://settlement.org/ontario/legal-services/courts/courts-in-ontario/what-are-legal-tribunals-and-boards/ or the Administrative Tribunals Support Service of Canada Act http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/A-1.5/page-1.html for examples. I've suggested that the article creator add a lede to explain Canadian tribunals. Meters (talk) 18:51, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- By the way, failing to demonstrate notability is not a valid reason for deletion. This seems to be a failure of WP:BEFORE. Meters (talk) 19:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:CLN. But let's rename per List of tribunals in the United Kingdom. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:32, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:33, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:33, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:33, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Though the list may need a lot of work. There's orgs here that aren't identified as "tribunals" and may well not be. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:39, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree that the article content may not be ideal, but there's no doubt that there are multiple notable entities that can be described as Canadian tribunals, so a list of this title should exist. The issue of what should be included is a content issue, not an existential issue. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 21:19, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:50, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, we see that in addition to the list, above, the UK has a main article, too: Tribunals in the United Kingdom. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:24, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Qualifies for an article per WP:NOTDUP relative to Category:Canadian tribunals and Category:Ontario government tribunals. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:26, 3 December 2016 (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.