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.
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by
a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (
prod,
CfD,
TfD etc.) related to Canada. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
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:
Fails
WP:MUSICBIO. No discography or chart activity, and no third-party independent coverage. Sources are all primary, consisting of promotional interviews, press releases, and subject's hometown publication (Ottawa Citizen).
💥Casualty• Hop along. • 04:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - The Ottawa Citzen article was reliable, but there is no widespread coverage in reliable source about this person or their music. No charted songs or notable awards.
Magnolia677 (
talk) 10:39, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
No real indication of notability, only sources are routine 'match reports' on poker news sites and a stats database. No rule about number of bracelets won to determine notability. Doesn't meet
WP:NBIO. -
UtherSRG(talk) 14:41, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Note: Article was previously created by blocked user, deleted, then re-deleted as G5. New article is fresh and not a G5 candidate. -
UtherSRG(talk) 14:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose based on potential impact I will not disagree about there not being a rule about what is notable in the poker community around here but there is much inconsistency. If Engel is deemed not to be notable, then probably at least over half of legacy poker articles on here need to be wiped. I noticed the nominator's other tagged deletions, which I agree with because they do not bring much to the table. Bracelets are considered the gold standard in the poker community and three is nothing to scoff at. The circuit rings record alone should warrant merit but that is justm y opinion. Major titles won, money earned, or major impact historically on pop culture through the game should be what merits a player's notability in my opinion. It would be nice to have a set standard on what is deemed worthy so time on improvements is not wasted.
Red Director (
talk) 14:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Note I have been around the poker community on here for years so although it would be sad to lose legacy articles,
some of these do not warrant merit existance at all if this is the standard we want to place. Engel has more accomplishments of note than most of these on a quick glance.
Red Director (
talk) 15:26, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
"major impact historically on pop culture through the game" - surely someone has described that impact. Then, it's just a matter of writing down who that person was, and we have a source that contributes to notability. The thing we can't do, on the other hand, is that one of us, a Wikipedia user, is the one who discerns the cultural impact. It has to be verified by another party.
Geschichte (
talk) 20:24, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Engel definetly does not check the box of culturally impactful poker player lol. The only things that maybe make sense for the article being retained are his accomplishments which gulf many other players here who do not even come close to that pedigree. I do not care if this article stays or leaves personally. Existing articles make a case for keeping is all I am saying.
Red Director (
talk) 20:57, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Well, I found this
[1], a primary source where the subject talks about himself. I still don't see enough in RS to build an article here.
Oaktree b (
talk) 15:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: PROMO. sourcing is primary, a 404 link (?) and sites that talk about the school in passing. Could perhaps merge a line or two into the University article, but this reads as a PR piece.
Oaktree b (
talk) 01:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:PROMO and
WP:ESSAY. This is not notable as a standalone topic or as a search term for a redirect.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 07:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Besides the first Google news hit, the rest of the coverage I found was not in depth. Fails
WP:BIO.
LibStar (
talk) 19:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, as indicated by
LibStar, ambassadors are not inheritably notable - lacks any evidence of notable achievements either in that role or prior to their appointment. Cited references just confirm the individual's appointment nothing else.
Dan arndt (
talk) 01:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete I couldn't find any notable events in their career as an ambassador, and none are mentioned in the references either.
Fails
WP:BASIC,
WP:ANYBIO, and
WP:MUSICBIO. Unable to locate any significant biographical details in secondary sources; sources are mostly obituaries. No indication of awards or charted songs.
Magnolia677 (
talk) 12:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - This happens quite often with murdered musicians, especially rappers. The fact that his murder was covered in media does not make him notable, unless there is additional analysis per the requirements of
WP:VICTIM. His music gained no notice during his lifetime, and the only reason we even know he was a rapper is because his obituaries said it, so there is not enough per
WP:NMUSICIAN either. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (
TALK|
CONTRIBS) 00:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: While the murder is tragic, media coverage alone doesn't establish notability. There's no indication the music gained significant public attention during his lifetime.
Waqar💬 18:17, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Fails
WP:NMUSIC with no chart or notable label activity. Death does not establish notability as slain rappers will make the obligatory headlines.
💥Casualty• Hop along. • 22:51, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Fails
WP:NPERSON. Non-notable individual, run-of-the-mill educational administrator. No claim of notability (except perhaps for the Platinum Jubilee Medal, but even that was given to 420 000 individuals worldwide).
WP:PROMO, reads like a
WP:RESUME. Potentially violation of
WP:COI as the editor is a single topic editor, and claims to own the copyright of a picture of the subject.
Melmann 11:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, but edit. This article needs substantial trimming and rewriting to change it from a resume to a Wikipedia page. However the subject is the president of
Northlands College, which appears to satisfy C6 of
WP:NPROF.
Qflib (
talk) 03:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I've made a number of edits towards
WP:NOTRESUME; hope this is helpful.
Qflib (
talk) 03:37, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Qflib Is
Northlands College a “major academic institution”? I can't even find it among any of the major university rankings (but, it's possible I'm just bad at searching).
Melmann 07:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Historically we look for schools to offer masters degrees or higher as one indication of whether it qualifies (this excludes community colleges). This school qualifies under that criterion.
Qflib (
talk) 20:48, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Isn't this entity the result of three community colleges joining together? In any case, what would be a (non-major) academic institution? Like a vocational school?
Melmann 09:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
A vocational school does not offer graduate degrees (masters or higher). I would not consider a college that only offers associate and/or bachelor’s degrees and is not otherwise notable to be “major.”
There are a few R1 universities that started off as teacher’s colleges and only offered bachelor’s degrees originally. So IMO the history of how the college came to be isn’t directly relevant as to whether it is currently “major” for our purposes here.
Qflib (
talk) 13:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. I don't think Northlands is major enough to qualify for #C6, and we should go through GNG instead. All our sources are currently PR fluff, stories about Northlands, or stories about the one event of him becoming head of Northlands. I don't think that's enough. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 17:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree about GNG. But since we don't have a specific definition of what "major" means in
WP:NPROF, I do tend to think we should assume that a school fits the criterion if they offer one or more graduate degrees, or if they are a historically significant institution (like Oberlin or Byrn Mawr). Of course, I respect your opinion to the contrary.
Qflib (
talk) 20:33, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
In this case, it appears to be a conglomeration of three community colleges. I think we've generally held that community colleges don't count for this. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 21:20, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Northlands College is a public institution service 50 percent of the landmass of Saskatchewan. As a public institution it offers a comprehensive array of programs from adult education to masters degrees with an indigenous student population of over 90 percent. I think the confusion here is the understanding of higher education in the USA vs Canada.
2001:56A:6FF0:41DD:55A9:9553:A7EA:A447 (
talk) 11:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
David, this particular institution offers bachelors degrees and at least one master’s degree, unless I’m reading this wrong. If I’m wrong, apologies.
Qflib (
talk) 13:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Semi-advertorialized article about a regional graphic design award, not
properly sourced as passing notability criteria for events. As always, events are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass
WP:GNG on third-party media coverage about them -- but this is "referenced" entirely to the organization's own
self-published content about itself, with absolutely no evidence of third-party attention shown at all. It also warrants note that this was a
conflict of interest from the start, as the article creator's username of "Gdcbc" corresponds letter-for-letter to the name of the organization that presents this award, the Graphic Designers of Canada, British Columbia. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt it from having to pass GNG on its sourceability.
Bearcat (
talk) 20:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Appears to be a minor award. There are no citations on the page and I can't find any mentions of this in .ca websites, besides a few homepages for the winners and some design schools.
Oaktree b (
talk) 22:40, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Request to turn into Redirect to Musk (Disambiguation).
Article fails to demonstrate the notability of the "Musk Family" as an organisation or group, instead it is clearly serving as little more than a duplication of the existing disambiguation page. The short history section may have reliable sourcing but it is very blatantly written in terms of only Elon Musk and no-one else, and looks to be a cut down version of what's on his article's page which arguably evidences the lack of notability of the family as a whole.
Therefore the page should be turned into a redirect to the Disambiguation page until such a time noteworthiness of the family is established.
Rambling Rambler (
talk) 12:03, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
This article should have never existed, it's an embarrassment. There is nothing notable about the Musk family besides Elon.
101.98.188.156 (
talk) 21:44, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Musk (disambiguation)#People – or split
Musk (surname) from the main Musk dab page and redirect to the surname page instead. The family includes several notable individuals, but there is nothing notable about the family in its own right that would meet
WP:GNG or
WP:NLIST.
Rosbif73 (
talk) 12:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Musk (disambiguation)#People as the whole article centres around Elon's family until the Notable members section. A family is rarely notable of itself, excptions being the
Windsors which redirects to
House of Windsor and is a royal dynasty like the
Ming dynasty, or the
Kennedy family which is genuinely notable though as pointed out in
this guideline that doesn't mean that all individuals in that family are notable by association (which this article seems to suggest). — Iadmc♫talk 17:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - I see what is trying to be accomplished, organizing a set of existing pieces on racism by country. I'm good with it.
Carrite (
talk) 16:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge then Redirect - I concur with the original requester. Any content that happens to be unique to this article (I couldn't find any in my review) should be moved to one of the country-specific articles. Then, it should be redirected to a list of the country-specific articles.
Garsh (
talk) 23:30, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:33, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you. I lean delete for this, if not for the fact that we have
Military history of Canada, but also that the grouping of conflicts/battles are better suited as a category. I couldn't find anything off a basic google search for this grouping, but maybe there's a book or something.
Conyo14 (
talk) 21:48, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Conyo14 Good point. Alternately, what we could do instead, is integrate this list into
List of Canadian military victories, which would then be reworked to a standardised
List of wars and battles involving Canada instead, while purging all wars and battles which took place on what is now Canadian soil that did not involve "Canada" as such. The current
List of Canadian military victories relies on a single source, and conveniently leaves out all Canadian military defeats, and all conflict results which were a bit "meh" (also known as "inconclusive" or "indecisive").
NLeeuw (
talk) 07:22, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait, let's first take stock of which lists we've already got, because there seems to be a lot of
WP:OVERLAP.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Still looks like there is some debate about the content of this article. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:48, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Fails GNG. Nothing in Google news or books. Nothing when searching in cbc.ca. Only primary sources in plain Google search.
LibStar (
talk) 04:43, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 03:01, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I wondered why it is retained on Wikipedia from 2006 till this moment. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
War Term (
talk •
contribs) 02:28, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
You've not given a valid reason for deletion. Deletion is based on the subject of the article, not the condition of the article. See
WP:BEFORE.
4.37.252.50 (
talk) 00:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete lack of notability and no sources since 2006 — Iadmc♫talk 00:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. I agree the article in its current state lacks sources. However, under
WP:ARTN, Article content does not determine notability. Notability is a property of a subject and not of a Wikipedia article. If the subject has not been covered outside of Wikipedia,
no amount of improvement to the Wikipedia content will suddenly make the subject notable. Conversely, if the
source material exists, even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability. I added a couple sources to the article, and also posted multiple potential sources from
ProQuest at
Talk:Westview Secondary School. Based on these sources, this subject meets
WP:GNG, per criteria at
WP:NSCHOOL.
— Grand'mere Eugene (
talk) 04:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Only one of the sources might add notability to the school: "Nash Taylor placed second in a global competition". Just because a school exists and is mentioned in multiple sources doing normal things for a school, this doesn't establish notability. — Iadmc♫talk 08:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
No, you misunderstand WP's concept of notability. See
WP:N, which says Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity. Notability rests on significant coverage in reliable sources.
— Grand'mere Eugene (
talk) 10:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Exactly: "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail. Of the cited sources, only one does this (ApplyBoard) and I'm not convinced of its independence. I need to join ProQuest to verify the sources on the talk page so bear with me on that — Iadmc♫talk 11:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Not able to join ProQuest as a non-academic as I'm not at a university etc :( — Iadmc♫talk 11:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ah. Another user pointed me to The Wikipedia Library. Bingo I'm in. I'll check out the subject soon — Iadmc♫talk 11:36, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DoczillaOhhhhhh, no! 05:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: This is about all I can find
[2] that's not related to regular school items (a concert, a student getting an award/scholarship)... I don't think we have enough for notability here. A school from the 1970s likely won't have notability as an historic building either.
Oaktree b (
talk) 12:17, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep: Stein meets the
WP:GNG with significant coverage from reliable sources such as [
[3]], [
[4]] and [
[5]]. This is also
WP:SIGCOV but is not independent: [
[6]].
Let'srun (
talk) 10:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: We need more people to participate in AfD discussions. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 15:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete The "oursportscentral" article is a rather typical "new job announcement" and doesn't do much to support GNG. The Vancouver Sun 2004 article is a single sentence. The Rotman article is not independent, it's one of those alumnus blurbs. While it might provide some facts it is a good bet that they come directly from the subject. The only possible significant article I see is the Vancouver Sun 2005 one. It talks about the subject as beginning a career, and given that was in 2005 I would expect to have seen later articles about a career, but I don't.
Lamona (
talk) 22:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Highly unlikely to pass the
WP:10YEARTEST (and
WP:SUSTAINED). Content which isn't related to the song isn't substantial enough to merit a stand-alone article. – Hilst[talk] 15:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep it not only got popular because of the feud but it has been in business since 1976. So it will continue to be in the news and magazines (especially local ones like Now) as it has been for the last several decades Freedun (
yippity yap) 18:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
it will get coverage because it is a very popular restaurant in toronto regardless of the feud Freedun (
yippity yap) 18:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, took a spin through the hits, and before the feud there’s not enough coverage for an article, just lists, listicles, coverage of nearby crime, and one art collective that named itself after the restaurant, everyday restaurant coverage stuff, not anything that would give the restuarant lasting notability. Ruth Bader Yinzburg (
Ruth Bader Yinzburg)
Here are some news articles from a long while before the feud.
[7][8]Freedun (
yippity yap) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge with
Drake–Kendrick Lamar feud or delete. There is no SIGCOV outside the feud and a shooting that occurred in proximity of the restaurant, therefore not enough to pass GNG independently. --
hroest 17:33, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DoczillaOhhhhhh, no! 07:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent
reliable sources.
Sources published before the
Kendrick Lamar song "
Euphoria" was released on 30 April 2024:
The review notes: "We do that now at the New Ho King, owned by Howard Wong (and his nephew Albert Wong) who once worked in his father's Rose Garden Cafe in Moose Jaw, Sask., a city where, in fact, writer Fred Wah's grandfather also cooked. The New Ho King's menu covers cooking from various regions of China, but more than anything, customers know it's grounded in Cantonese cuisine as familiar as an old friend. We remember the original Ho King on Dundas St. at Larch St., a tiny block east of Spadina Ave. There we'd pick at periwinkles in black bean sauce at 3 a.m. But 10 years ago, it closed its doors. Then in 1996, there was news. It had resurfaced on Spadina Ave. under new owners, but with their friend, original chef/owner Tom Quan, at the wok."
The review notes: "It is quite simple, not high-end dramatic. But servings are large, and few Cantonese kitchens are cooking with such accomplishment and light touch, while leaving an equally light trace on the wallet."
Kaplan, Ben (2008-01-12). "New Ho King Restaurant" (pages
1 and
2). National Post. Archived from the original (pages
1 and
2) on 2024-06-13. Retrieved 2024-06-13 – via
Newspapers.com.
The review notes: "Our Chinese food restaurants should be open for delivery after the bars close, and this inexpensive Spadina Avenue Cantonese greasy spoon is as good as we've tasted any hour of the day. The pork chow mein ($6.95) is crunchy and the stir-fried noodle is wet, dripping with a tangy black bean sauce chock full of beef and bean sprouts Perhaps the General Tso chicken ($8.50) left something to be desired; a harder fried outer coating might have provided a sharper contrast with the white chicken meat, but this restaurant is a revelation—the only way to improve it would be to include a 3:05 a.m. helping of cold tea with its lightning-fast delivery."
The review notes: "1. New Ho King. 416 Spadina Ave. Everybody knows this late-night spot feeds the drunks till 5 a.m. (see our cold tea story on Page 13), but few know that you actually don't have to endure a room filled with club-land loudmouths to get your fix of chow mein. The better alternative: Go home and call for delivery. You can get your fried rice in the comfort of your living room as late as 3 a.m. on weekdays and even later on weekends."
The book notes: "Even on a Sunday night you could be lined up outside the door for this place. New Ho attracts all ages until the wee hours of the morning. There's an unbelievable selection of Chinese and Cantonese dishes, all served very fresh at reasonable prices. Don't forget to try the hot & sour soup ($5) - excellent and they don't skimp on the shrimp. Other favs include the General Tso chicken ($7.95) and the eggplant and shrimp with garlic sauce ($8.50). A worthwhile stop in downtown Chinatown."
The article notes: "It might not be the most cutting-edge Cantonese kitchen on the Avenue but New Ho King is certainly one of the most popular as the lengthy lineups after last call will attest. To handle the crowds, NHK has moved into much larger and far swankier split-level digs three doors away. ... The food’s the same as it ever was, a little bit too salty and verging on over-cooked. Like that matters at 3 am?"
Sources published after the
Kendrick Lamar song "
Euphoria" was released on 30 April 2024:
The article notes: "Caught in the middle of this culture-consuming rivalry is New Ho King, an unassuming restaurant in Toronto’s Chinatown. The restaurant, which has served dishes like hot-pot grouper and tofu, and sweet-and-sour pork with pineapple to Torontonians for nearly 50 years, was briefly name-checked in “Euphoria.”"
The article notes: "New Ho King, which has operated in the city’s Chinatown for nearly five decades, is still grappling with the newfound fame. Until recently, its tables would be sparsely populated on weekday evenings, picking up pace on the weekends as late-night crowds wandered in. But on a Thursday evening, a line snaked out the door as diners clamoured for a table. Passersby stopped outside the pink glow of the restaurant’s neon sign and posed for photos. ... Neither Lamar nor Drake specify which rice dish diners should order from the 14 menu options: the most popular is the Ho King Special Fried Rice, a mix of shrimp, pork, eggs, peas and lettuce."
The article notes: "At 410 Spadina Ave., in the heart of Toronto’s historic Chinatown, New Ho King is a go-to spot for authentic Chinese food and late-night eats."
Fails
WP:NACTOR and
WP:GNG, respectively because his roles are limited to supporting/minor characters and article lacks sufficient sources. He was last known for starring in The Andromeda Strain before disappearing from the entertainment industry in 2008. My Google searches exclusively showed coverage about the Czech actor but nothing about the younger Michal Suchánek. No news have been reported on him for more than 15 years either.
Clara A. Djalim (
talk) 13:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep Some roles seem verry very mildly significant. But the 1st source on the page mentions 1 Emmy nomination and 2 Young Artist Award nominations which may have him meet ANYBIO. Notable as a child actor, then.-
My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:25, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 14:10, 7 June 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
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 18:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Selective Merge to
Cardus, or possibly redirect. This is far too much detail for an article about a report that doesn't have any secondary sources about the report (just sources about Cardus, or Cardus's funding).
Walsh90210 (
talk) 22:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, relies almost exclusively on the report itself.
Toadspike[Talk] 10:34, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:51, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
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.
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by
a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (
prod,
CfD,
TfD etc.) related to Canada. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
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:
Fails
WP:MUSICBIO. No discography or chart activity, and no third-party independent coverage. Sources are all primary, consisting of promotional interviews, press releases, and subject's hometown publication (Ottawa Citizen).
💥Casualty• Hop along. • 04:11, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - The Ottawa Citzen article was reliable, but there is no widespread coverage in reliable source about this person or their music. No charted songs or notable awards.
Magnolia677 (
talk) 10:39, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
No real indication of notability, only sources are routine 'match reports' on poker news sites and a stats database. No rule about number of bracelets won to determine notability. Doesn't meet
WP:NBIO. -
UtherSRG(talk) 14:41, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Note: Article was previously created by blocked user, deleted, then re-deleted as G5. New article is fresh and not a G5 candidate. -
UtherSRG(talk) 14:45, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Oppose based on potential impact I will not disagree about there not being a rule about what is notable in the poker community around here but there is much inconsistency. If Engel is deemed not to be notable, then probably at least over half of legacy poker articles on here need to be wiped. I noticed the nominator's other tagged deletions, which I agree with because they do not bring much to the table. Bracelets are considered the gold standard in the poker community and three is nothing to scoff at. The circuit rings record alone should warrant merit but that is justm y opinion. Major titles won, money earned, or major impact historically on pop culture through the game should be what merits a player's notability in my opinion. It would be nice to have a set standard on what is deemed worthy so time on improvements is not wasted.
Red Director (
talk) 14:49, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Note I have been around the poker community on here for years so although it would be sad to lose legacy articles,
some of these do not warrant merit existance at all if this is the standard we want to place. Engel has more accomplishments of note than most of these on a quick glance.
Red Director (
talk) 15:26, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
"major impact historically on pop culture through the game" - surely someone has described that impact. Then, it's just a matter of writing down who that person was, and we have a source that contributes to notability. The thing we can't do, on the other hand, is that one of us, a Wikipedia user, is the one who discerns the cultural impact. It has to be verified by another party.
Geschichte (
talk) 20:24, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Engel definetly does not check the box of culturally impactful poker player lol. The only things that maybe make sense for the article being retained are his accomplishments which gulf many other players here who do not even come close to that pedigree. I do not care if this article stays or leaves personally. Existing articles make a case for keeping is all I am saying.
Red Director (
talk) 20:57, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Well, I found this
[1], a primary source where the subject talks about himself. I still don't see enough in RS to build an article here.
Oaktree b (
talk) 15:10, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: PROMO. sourcing is primary, a 404 link (?) and sites that talk about the school in passing. Could perhaps merge a line or two into the University article, but this reads as a PR piece.
Oaktree b (
talk) 01:00, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per
WP:PROMO and
WP:ESSAY. This is not notable as a standalone topic or as a search term for a redirect.
Dclemens1971 (
talk) 07:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ambassadors are not inherently notable. Besides the first Google news hit, the rest of the coverage I found was not in depth. Fails
WP:BIO.
LibStar (
talk) 19:07, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, as indicated by
LibStar, ambassadors are not inheritably notable - lacks any evidence of notable achievements either in that role or prior to their appointment. Cited references just confirm the individual's appointment nothing else.
Dan arndt (
talk) 01:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete I couldn't find any notable events in their career as an ambassador, and none are mentioned in the references either.
Fails
WP:BASIC,
WP:ANYBIO, and
WP:MUSICBIO. Unable to locate any significant biographical details in secondary sources; sources are mostly obituaries. No indication of awards or charted songs.
Magnolia677 (
talk) 12:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete - This happens quite often with murdered musicians, especially rappers. The fact that his murder was covered in media does not make him notable, unless there is additional analysis per the requirements of
WP:VICTIM. His music gained no notice during his lifetime, and the only reason we even know he was a rapper is because his obituaries said it, so there is not enough per
WP:NMUSICIAN either. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (
TALK|
CONTRIBS) 00:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: While the murder is tragic, media coverage alone doesn't establish notability. There's no indication the music gained significant public attention during his lifetime.
Waqar💬 18:17, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete Fails
WP:NMUSIC with no chart or notable label activity. Death does not establish notability as slain rappers will make the obligatory headlines.
💥Casualty• Hop along. • 22:51, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Fails
WP:NPERSON. Non-notable individual, run-of-the-mill educational administrator. No claim of notability (except perhaps for the Platinum Jubilee Medal, but even that was given to 420 000 individuals worldwide).
WP:PROMO, reads like a
WP:RESUME. Potentially violation of
WP:COI as the editor is a single topic editor, and claims to own the copyright of a picture of the subject.
Melmann 11:21, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep, but edit. This article needs substantial trimming and rewriting to change it from a resume to a Wikipedia page. However the subject is the president of
Northlands College, which appears to satisfy C6 of
WP:NPROF.
Qflib (
talk) 03:22, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I've made a number of edits towards
WP:NOTRESUME; hope this is helpful.
Qflib (
talk) 03:37, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Qflib Is
Northlands College a “major academic institution”? I can't even find it among any of the major university rankings (but, it's possible I'm just bad at searching).
Melmann 07:20, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Historically we look for schools to offer masters degrees or higher as one indication of whether it qualifies (this excludes community colleges). This school qualifies under that criterion.
Qflib (
talk) 20:48, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Isn't this entity the result of three community colleges joining together? In any case, what would be a (non-major) academic institution? Like a vocational school?
Melmann 09:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
A vocational school does not offer graduate degrees (masters or higher). I would not consider a college that only offers associate and/or bachelor’s degrees and is not otherwise notable to be “major.”
There are a few R1 universities that started off as teacher’s colleges and only offered bachelor’s degrees originally. So IMO the history of how the college came to be isn’t directly relevant as to whether it is currently “major” for our purposes here.
Qflib (
talk) 13:42, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete. I don't think Northlands is major enough to qualify for #C6, and we should go through GNG instead. All our sources are currently PR fluff, stories about Northlands, or stories about the one event of him becoming head of Northlands. I don't think that's enough. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 17:28, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I agree about GNG. But since we don't have a specific definition of what "major" means in
WP:NPROF, I do tend to think we should assume that a school fits the criterion if they offer one or more graduate degrees, or if they are a historically significant institution (like Oberlin or Byrn Mawr). Of course, I respect your opinion to the contrary.
Qflib (
talk) 20:33, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
In this case, it appears to be a conglomeration of three community colleges. I think we've generally held that community colleges don't count for this. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 21:20, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Northlands College is a public institution service 50 percent of the landmass of Saskatchewan. As a public institution it offers a comprehensive array of programs from adult education to masters degrees with an indigenous student population of over 90 percent. I think the confusion here is the understanding of higher education in the USA vs Canada.
2001:56A:6FF0:41DD:55A9:9553:A7EA:A447 (
talk) 11:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
David, this particular institution offers bachelors degrees and at least one master’s degree, unless I’m reading this wrong. If I’m wrong, apologies.
Qflib (
talk) 13:44, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Semi-advertorialized article about a regional graphic design award, not
properly sourced as passing notability criteria for events. As always, events are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, and have to be shown to pass
WP:GNG on third-party media coverage about them -- but this is "referenced" entirely to the organization's own
self-published content about itself, with absolutely no evidence of third-party attention shown at all. It also warrants note that this was a
conflict of interest from the start, as the article creator's username of "Gdcbc" corresponds letter-for-letter to the name of the organization that presents this award, the Graphic Designers of Canada, British Columbia. Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt it from having to pass GNG on its sourceability.
Bearcat (
talk) 20:16, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: Appears to be a minor award. There are no citations on the page and I can't find any mentions of this in .ca websites, besides a few homepages for the winners and some design schools.
Oaktree b (
talk) 22:40, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Request to turn into Redirect to Musk (Disambiguation).
Article fails to demonstrate the notability of the "Musk Family" as an organisation or group, instead it is clearly serving as little more than a duplication of the existing disambiguation page. The short history section may have reliable sourcing but it is very blatantly written in terms of only Elon Musk and no-one else, and looks to be a cut down version of what's on his article's page which arguably evidences the lack of notability of the family as a whole.
Therefore the page should be turned into a redirect to the Disambiguation page until such a time noteworthiness of the family is established.
Rambling Rambler (
talk) 12:03, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
This article should have never existed, it's an embarrassment. There is nothing notable about the Musk family besides Elon.
101.98.188.156 (
talk) 21:44, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Musk (disambiguation)#People – or split
Musk (surname) from the main Musk dab page and redirect to the surname page instead. The family includes several notable individuals, but there is nothing notable about the family in its own right that would meet
WP:GNG or
WP:NLIST.
Rosbif73 (
talk) 12:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Musk (disambiguation)#People as the whole article centres around Elon's family until the Notable members section. A family is rarely notable of itself, excptions being the
Windsors which redirects to
House of Windsor and is a royal dynasty like the
Ming dynasty, or the
Kennedy family which is genuinely notable though as pointed out in
this guideline that doesn't mean that all individuals in that family are notable by association (which this article seems to suggest). — Iadmc♫talk 17:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep - I see what is trying to be accomplished, organizing a set of existing pieces on racism by country. I'm good with it.
Carrite (
talk) 16:50, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge then Redirect - I concur with the original requester. Any content that happens to be unique to this article (I couldn't find any in my review) should be moved to one of the country-specific articles. Then, it should be redirected to a list of the country-specific articles.
Garsh (
talk) 23:30, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:33, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Thank you. I lean delete for this, if not for the fact that we have
Military history of Canada, but also that the grouping of conflicts/battles are better suited as a category. I couldn't find anything off a basic google search for this grouping, but maybe there's a book or something.
Conyo14 (
talk) 21:48, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
@
Conyo14 Good point. Alternately, what we could do instead, is integrate this list into
List of Canadian military victories, which would then be reworked to a standardised
List of wars and battles involving Canada instead, while purging all wars and battles which took place on what is now Canadian soil that did not involve "Canada" as such. The current
List of Canadian military victories relies on a single source, and conveniently leaves out all Canadian military defeats, and all conflict results which were a bit "meh" (also known as "inconclusive" or "indecisive").
NLeeuw (
talk) 07:22, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Wait, let's first take stock of which lists we've already got, because there seems to be a lot of
WP:OVERLAP.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Still looks like there is some debate about the content of this article. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:48, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Fails GNG. Nothing in Google news or books. Nothing when searching in cbc.ca. Only primary sources in plain Google search.
LibStar (
talk) 04:43, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 03:01, 11 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I wondered why it is retained on Wikipedia from 2006 till this moment. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
War Term (
talk •
contribs) 02:28, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
You've not given a valid reason for deletion. Deletion is based on the subject of the article, not the condition of the article. See
WP:BEFORE.
4.37.252.50 (
talk) 00:46, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete lack of notability and no sources since 2006 — Iadmc♫talk 00:52, 4 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep. I agree the article in its current state lacks sources. However, under
WP:ARTN, Article content does not determine notability. Notability is a property of a subject and not of a Wikipedia article. If the subject has not been covered outside of Wikipedia,
no amount of improvement to the Wikipedia content will suddenly make the subject notable. Conversely, if the
source material exists, even very poor writing and referencing within a Wikipedia article will not decrease the subject's notability. I added a couple sources to the article, and also posted multiple potential sources from
ProQuest at
Talk:Westview Secondary School. Based on these sources, this subject meets
WP:GNG, per criteria at
WP:NSCHOOL.
— Grand'mere Eugene (
talk) 04:28, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Only one of the sources might add notability to the school: "Nash Taylor placed second in a global competition". Just because a school exists and is mentioned in multiple sources doing normal things for a school, this doesn't establish notability. — Iadmc♫talk 08:10, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
No, you misunderstand WP's concept of notability. See
WP:N, which says Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things such as fame, importance, or popularity. Notability rests on significant coverage in reliable sources.
— Grand'mere Eugene (
talk) 10:59, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Exactly: "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail. Of the cited sources, only one does this (ApplyBoard) and I'm not convinced of its independence. I need to join ProQuest to verify the sources on the talk page so bear with me on that — Iadmc♫talk 11:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Not able to join ProQuest as a non-academic as I'm not at a university etc :( — Iadmc♫talk 11:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Ah. Another user pointed me to The Wikipedia Library. Bingo I'm in. I'll check out the subject soon — Iadmc♫talk 11:36, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DoczillaOhhhhhh, no! 05:22, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete: This is about all I can find
[2] that's not related to regular school items (a concert, a student getting an award/scholarship)... I don't think we have enough for notability here. A school from the 1970s likely won't have notability as an historic building either.
Oaktree b (
talk) 12:17, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep: Stein meets the
WP:GNG with significant coverage from reliable sources such as [
[3]], [
[4]] and [
[5]]. This is also
WP:SIGCOV but is not independent: [
[6]].
Let'srun (
talk) 10:17, 3 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: We need more people to participate in AfD discussions. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Cocobb8 (💬
talk • ✏️
contribs) 15:05, 9 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete The "oursportscentral" article is a rather typical "new job announcement" and doesn't do much to support GNG. The Vancouver Sun 2004 article is a single sentence. The Rotman article is not independent, it's one of those alumnus blurbs. While it might provide some facts it is a good bet that they come directly from the subject. The only possible significant article I see is the Vancouver Sun 2005 one. It talks about the subject as beginning a career, and given that was in 2005 I would expect to have seen later articles about a career, but I don't.
Lamona (
talk) 22:07, 12 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Highly unlikely to pass the
WP:10YEARTEST (and
WP:SUSTAINED). Content which isn't related to the song isn't substantial enough to merit a stand-alone article. – Hilst[talk] 15:50, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep it not only got popular because of the feud but it has been in business since 1976. So it will continue to be in the news and magazines (especially local ones like Now) as it has been for the last several decades Freedun (
yippity yap) 18:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
it will get coverage because it is a very popular restaurant in toronto regardless of the feud Freedun (
yippity yap) 18:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete per nom, took a spin through the hits, and before the feud there’s not enough coverage for an article, just lists, listicles, coverage of nearby crime, and one art collective that named itself after the restaurant, everyday restaurant coverage stuff, not anything that would give the restuarant lasting notability. Ruth Bader Yinzburg (
Ruth Bader Yinzburg)
Here are some news articles from a long while before the feud.
[7][8]Freedun (
yippity yap) 02:59, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Merge with
Drake–Kendrick Lamar feud or delete. There is no SIGCOV outside the feud and a shooting that occurred in proximity of the restaurant, therefore not enough to pass GNG independently. --
hroest 17:33, 6 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
DoczillaOhhhhhh, no! 07:54, 8 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent
reliable sources.
Sources published before the
Kendrick Lamar song "
Euphoria" was released on 30 April 2024:
The review notes: "We do that now at the New Ho King, owned by Howard Wong (and his nephew Albert Wong) who once worked in his father's Rose Garden Cafe in Moose Jaw, Sask., a city where, in fact, writer Fred Wah's grandfather also cooked. The New Ho King's menu covers cooking from various regions of China, but more than anything, customers know it's grounded in Cantonese cuisine as familiar as an old friend. We remember the original Ho King on Dundas St. at Larch St., a tiny block east of Spadina Ave. There we'd pick at periwinkles in black bean sauce at 3 a.m. But 10 years ago, it closed its doors. Then in 1996, there was news. It had resurfaced on Spadina Ave. under new owners, but with their friend, original chef/owner Tom Quan, at the wok."
The review notes: "It is quite simple, not high-end dramatic. But servings are large, and few Cantonese kitchens are cooking with such accomplishment and light touch, while leaving an equally light trace on the wallet."
Kaplan, Ben (2008-01-12). "New Ho King Restaurant" (pages
1 and
2). National Post. Archived from the original (pages
1 and
2) on 2024-06-13. Retrieved 2024-06-13 – via
Newspapers.com.
The review notes: "Our Chinese food restaurants should be open for delivery after the bars close, and this inexpensive Spadina Avenue Cantonese greasy spoon is as good as we've tasted any hour of the day. The pork chow mein ($6.95) is crunchy and the stir-fried noodle is wet, dripping with a tangy black bean sauce chock full of beef and bean sprouts Perhaps the General Tso chicken ($8.50) left something to be desired; a harder fried outer coating might have provided a sharper contrast with the white chicken meat, but this restaurant is a revelation—the only way to improve it would be to include a 3:05 a.m. helping of cold tea with its lightning-fast delivery."
The review notes: "1. New Ho King. 416 Spadina Ave. Everybody knows this late-night spot feeds the drunks till 5 a.m. (see our cold tea story on Page 13), but few know that you actually don't have to endure a room filled with club-land loudmouths to get your fix of chow mein. The better alternative: Go home and call for delivery. You can get your fried rice in the comfort of your living room as late as 3 a.m. on weekdays and even later on weekends."
The book notes: "Even on a Sunday night you could be lined up outside the door for this place. New Ho attracts all ages until the wee hours of the morning. There's an unbelievable selection of Chinese and Cantonese dishes, all served very fresh at reasonable prices. Don't forget to try the hot & sour soup ($5) - excellent and they don't skimp on the shrimp. Other favs include the General Tso chicken ($7.95) and the eggplant and shrimp with garlic sauce ($8.50). A worthwhile stop in downtown Chinatown."
The article notes: "It might not be the most cutting-edge Cantonese kitchen on the Avenue but New Ho King is certainly one of the most popular as the lengthy lineups after last call will attest. To handle the crowds, NHK has moved into much larger and far swankier split-level digs three doors away. ... The food’s the same as it ever was, a little bit too salty and verging on over-cooked. Like that matters at 3 am?"
Sources published after the
Kendrick Lamar song "
Euphoria" was released on 30 April 2024:
The article notes: "Caught in the middle of this culture-consuming rivalry is New Ho King, an unassuming restaurant in Toronto’s Chinatown. The restaurant, which has served dishes like hot-pot grouper and tofu, and sweet-and-sour pork with pineapple to Torontonians for nearly 50 years, was briefly name-checked in “Euphoria.”"
The article notes: "New Ho King, which has operated in the city’s Chinatown for nearly five decades, is still grappling with the newfound fame. Until recently, its tables would be sparsely populated on weekday evenings, picking up pace on the weekends as late-night crowds wandered in. But on a Thursday evening, a line snaked out the door as diners clamoured for a table. Passersby stopped outside the pink glow of the restaurant’s neon sign and posed for photos. ... Neither Lamar nor Drake specify which rice dish diners should order from the 14 menu options: the most popular is the Ho King Special Fried Rice, a mix of shrimp, pork, eggs, peas and lettuce."
The article notes: "At 410 Spadina Ave., in the heart of Toronto’s historic Chinatown, New Ho King is a go-to spot for authentic Chinese food and late-night eats."
Fails
WP:NACTOR and
WP:GNG, respectively because his roles are limited to supporting/minor characters and article lacks sufficient sources. He was last known for starring in The Andromeda Strain before disappearing from the entertainment industry in 2008. My Google searches exclusively showed coverage about the Czech actor but nothing about the younger Michal Suchánek. No news have been reported on him for more than 15 years either.
Clara A. Djalim (
talk) 13:47, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Keep Some roles seem verry very mildly significant. But the 1st source on the page mentions 1 Emmy nomination and 2 Young Artist Award nominations which may have him meet ANYBIO. Notable as a child actor, then.-
My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:25, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
✗plicit 14:10, 7 June 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
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Hey man im josh (
talk) 18:23, 31 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Selective Merge to
Cardus, or possibly redirect. This is far too much detail for an article about a report that doesn't have any secondary sources about the report (just sources about Cardus, or Cardus's funding).
Walsh90210 (
talk) 22:47, 1 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Delete, relies almost exclusively on the report itself.
Toadspike[Talk] 10:34, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LizRead!Talk! 22:51, 7 June 2024 (UTC)reply