Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Canada

Canada

Canada articles for deletion

William James Dawson

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

Not seeing the claim to notability. The sources on the page appear to either be written by the topic or close relatives of the topic. Notability isn't inherited, nor does being in an old encyclopedia mean that a topic is suitable for en.wiki JMWt (talk) 17:35, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. JMWt (talk) 17:35, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Christianity, Scotland, Canada, Massachusetts, and New Jersey. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:15, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Being included in an encyclopedia is in fact excellent evidence of notability. In addition to that citation, he received an obituary in the New York Times when he died.[1] He has an entry in the Oxford Companion to Edwardian Fiction.[2] He also received an obituary in the London Times[3] Here's another NY Times article.[4] An 1899 review of one of his novels in the South Australian Register.[5] A book review in The Critic.[6] A book review in The New Republic.[7] Another book review.[8] Jahaza (talk) 03:52, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
More[9][10][11] Jahaza (talk) 03:55, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I think Jahaza has very definitively established multiple areas of reliable and significant coverage. ~Darth Stabro^{Talk • Contribs} 04:16, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jahaza. The sources presented are more than sufficient to establish notability. MCE89 (talk) 14:54, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jahaza. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:01, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This really needs a ton of copy editing. It should have been draftified years ago, but now it's too late. Bearian (talk) 17:35, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gaurav Sharma (author)

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

A promotional article for a non notable author, by using aggressive PR techniques, unverified claims, paid for advertising articles, with a high chances of COI & UPE involved. All the books by the subject seems to be non notable but still the editor created articles for all of them. The subject clearly fails wp:NAUTHOR.

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Journalism, India, Bihar, Delhi, and Canada. Zuck28 (talk) 15:44, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I was going to wait to nominate this page until the AFDs for the subject's books have concluded - but none of the books appear notable to me, and if they are not notable then there is no case for WP:NAUTHOR.

Cf. the book discussions:

Astaire (talk) 16:41, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Astaire (talk) 16:42, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This cluster of articles appears to be promotional and based on only dubious sources. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 20:36, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Disappearance of Lilly and Jack Sullivan

AfDs for this article:

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

This tragic disappearance of two children happened about two months ago. In my last AfD, I highlighted concerns regarding the BLP violations going on at this article, and the lack of enduring historical significance as required by WP:EVENTCRIT. Simply put, this event cannot yet have enduring historical significance, as it only happened two months ago - there is nothing that sets this case apart and makes it particularly unique, and there has been no impact as a result of the case because it remains unsolved. Nothing about the RCMP's methods have changed as a result of this case, no laws have changed as a result of this case. Continued coverage on the topic has been largely retelling prior details, with the addition of the occasional statement from the RCMP. While tragic, this very much falls under routine and perhaps too soon. This case has sparked continued speculation on true crime forums across the net, leading to plenty of unsavoury discourse, which has led to such things as the inclusion of coordinates, and birthdates sourced to a Facebook post on this article. I don't dare edit this article myself beyond posting the AfD, because the RCMP have issued warnings regarding spreading rumours and misinformation about this family. The last AfD ended in no consensus, but I do not believe any convincing argument has yet been presented that asserts the notability of this event. MediaKyle (talk) 00:50, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Canada. MediaKyle (talk) 00:50, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:34, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the arguments outlined in WP:NOTTOOSOON, even if it’s an essay. I’m seeing WP:SUSTAINED coverage from at little as 2 days ago. There is no merit to the “it’s not unique” argument, as things don’t have to be unique to be notable. I’m also not sure why “true crime forums” were brought up in the nom statement… ^EF⁵ 15:20, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

God of the Sullied

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

Non notable book, promotional article. Sources are press releases, paid for spam articles. See also:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diary of a Whimsical Lover
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief and
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Long Live the Sullied.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Indian Story of an Author.
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gone Are the Days (novel). Zuck28 (talk) 21:18, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Fictional elements, Language, Literature, India, Delhi, and Canada. Zuck28 (talk) 21:18, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Sources 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 are not WP:SIGCOV of the book itself, but some other topic (the author's publishing house, the author's other books, etc.). Sources 4, 9, 10, 12, and 13 (same source as 4) are overly positive and promotional reviews with WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues. Source 2 is a broken link that I can't access through the Internet Archive. I can't find any proof of Source 11's existence. That leaves Source 8, which requires payment to view and wouldn't satisfy WP:NBOOK by itself anyway. Astaire (talk) 23:37, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Promotional and fails WP:NBOOK. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 20:26, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gone Are the Days (novel)

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

Non notable book. Fails GNG and NBOOK. Sources are poor to unreliable, primary PR links by Wp:NEWSORGINDIA.

Long Live the Sullied

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

Non notable book, promotion/ advertisement. Fails GNG, NBOOK. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diary of a Whimsical Lover. Zuck28 (talk) 20:46, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Literature, India, and Canada. Zuck28 (talk) 20:46, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Fails WP:NBOOK with WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues.

Source 2 has no reviewer byline, which WP:NEWSORGINDIA highlights as a cause for concern: use of generic bylines not identifying an individual reporter or reviewer. This is especially true for people, companies and entities of borderline notability, which is the case here.
Source 3 is from the same website and also about the book's prequel, not the book itself.
Source 4 is the same website that I discarded over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief for being overly promotional.

I haven't examined the first source in detail, but even with only one good source, it would fail WP:NBOOK anyway. Astaire (talk) 22:44, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Promotional and fails WP:NBOOK. Over this series of nominations, the Deccan Chronicle source comes closest to being an independent RS, but it's a very basic review, and one isn't enough. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 20:33, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Diary of a Whimsical Lover

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

Non notable book. Fails Wp:NBOOK, Wp:GNG and Wp:SIGCOV. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief. Zuck28 (talk) 20:41, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Fictional elements, Language, Literature, India, Delhi, and Canada. Zuck28 (talk) 20:41, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NBOOK with WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues.

The first reference is a broken link, and I can't find it on the Internet Archive.
The second and fourth references have the same issues that I raised over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Beyond Countless Grief - lack of a reviewer byline and overly promotional content, respectively.
The third reference is a brief three-sentence plot summary without expressing any opinion on the book. Doesn't qualify for criterion #1 of WP:BKCRIT.

Astaire (talk) 22:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Promotional and fails WP:NBOOK. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 20:27, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Beyond Countless Grief

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

Non notable book. Fails Wp:NBOOK, Wp:GNG and Wp:SIGCOV. No sources except two poorly written press releases/non-bylined promotional pieces and an unreliable dead link. Possibly a case of COI/UPE. User: Bond111 and their alternative account user:Dial911 were heavily involved in the creation and editing of the articles related to the author Gaurav Sharma (author) and his non-notable books. Zuck28 (talk) 20:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts, Fictional elements, Language, Literature, India, Delhi, and Canada. Zuck28 (talk) 20:30, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Can't find anything online apart from the sources mentioned above. Looking through databases I have access to shows no results whatsoever. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 20:44, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NBOOK with serious WP:NEWSORGINDIA issues. I can't find evidence that the first source even exists. The second source [12] byline is "News Desk Team". It is highly unorthodox for a book review not to mention the reviewer's name, and it also goes against their own editorial standards [13]: Articles must mention all individuals who worked on the piece, including authors, contributors, and editors. The third source [14] is overly promotional (there are headers for "Sponsored Guest Post" and "Brand Partnership") and does not look like a reputable news source (the website no longer even exists). Astaire (talk) 21:57, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Promotional and fails WP:NBOOK. Barnards.tar.gz (talk) 20:27, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brian Beattie

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

Non-notable individual. A WP:BEFORE shows results about a musician, who is unrelated to the subject in question. Lack of reliable sourcing is also evident. Fails WP:GNG. CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:07, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Businesspeople, and Religion. CycloneYoris ^talk! 23:07, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:40, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Looking into it, all the sources are from organizations he's worked with or spoken for. If he's notable, then I qualify for a Wikipedia article. I don't see any reasonable AtD. ~ Pbritti (talk) 01:54, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: YT and linkedin as references? Totally non reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG. Baqi:) (talk) 06:43, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Local pastor doing good [15], very much non-notable for our purposes. Nothing much different than any other person doing a similar job. Oaktree b (talk) 14:34, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete completely non-notable. Best, GPL93 (talk) 15:19, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - not a single reliable source for a BLP. While not required, I did some searches online. Trying to find any sources are difficult, because false positives come up, including a videographer from Chicago and a friend of a friend who is an assistant chief of the New York City Department of Sanitation. Bearian (talk) 16:42, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I spent a few hours researching the subject independently and was unable to find any evidence of notability in the form of reliable source significant coverage. Zach^H007 00:15, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

David Thomas King School

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

No WP:SIGCOV, fails the general notability guideline ProtobowlAddict ^talk! 03:36, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Schools, and Canada. ProtobowlAddict ^talk! 03:36, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Roessler

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

Promotional, fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Sources in article do not show significant coverage; only one primarily focused on him is WP:IMDB (WP:BEFORE didn't turn anything up either). GoldRomean (talk) 19:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Actors and filmmakers. GoldRomean (talk) 19:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:22, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lacks independent, authoritative sources that meaningfully address the actor CivicInk (talk) 20:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also I think that editors should check other wikipedia lang sections CivicInk (talk) 20:05, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@CivicInk - Out of curiosity, what does this comment mean? GoldRomean (talk) 21:28, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like a promo compain in a few lang sections for person CivicInk (talk) 13:51, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:51, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - his role in Dead to Me was fairly significant but I don't see any others so we're short of the SNG for actors. This is the only secondary source I can find that gives any meaningful info about him, and it's on romper.com. Zzz plant (talk) 23:43, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maryanne Oketch

AfDs for this article:

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

When I first nominated the article, I just assumed that the WP:BLP1E applies and would overrule notability guidelines, like WP:GNG. However, the voters disagreed with each other about BLP1E and applying it, and the participation was sorta low-ish, resulting in "no consensus". To complicate matters, not even WP:BIO1E, which applies to anybody, living or deceased, was mentioned.

Fast forward to today, more concerning as should've been addressed earlier is her compliance with WP:N, especially WP:GNG and/or WP:PAGEDECIDE, and WP:NBASIC. Additionally, WP:BIO1E should apply if BLP1E doesn't, and WP:BIOSPECIAL should apply in case she meets only "additional" criteria instead of "basic" ones. I re-raised the notability issue a couple months back.

Transcluding from Talk:Maryanne Oketch

Two years after the prior AFD discussion was closed as "no consensus", I've still yet to see reliable secondary sources demonstrate this person's general or basic notability, despite her status as the second black female Survivor winner. In the prior AFD nom, I've refuted two "keep" votes that cite the sources like interviews (exemplifying primary sources, like this now-defunct video interview) and the winners/losers list of 2022 (verifying her as the Survivor winner), but... Well, the AFD result's there, so that's that.
So far, she's not listed for not-yet-filmed Survivor 50, and she's yet to appear on Big Brother. Even if she were to appear there or become a doctor, per WP:BIOSPECIAL, she still wouldn't be basically or generally notable.
If looking for reliable sources to verify her notability as a medical student, I'm doing my best:

Interviews, which don't count per WP:GNG and WP:NRVE: CBC, Global News (Canada)

School newspaper article from the medical school that she's attending; a university newspaper.

George Ho (talk) 19:44, 28 May 2025 (UTC)

Since then, I've yet to see her appear on Big Brother and my concerns being addressed, especially about her notability outside Survivor. Well, even appearing on Big Brother still might not make her generally or basically notable. Preferably, per cited rules, the page must be redirected to Survivor 42. George Ho (talk) 20:36, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Television, Medicine, Germany, and Canada. George Ho (talk) 20:36, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Survivor 42. WP:BLP1E, WP:SUSTAINED, WP:PAGEDECIDE, WP:CRUFT, WP:NOTPLOT... etc. etc. etc. Take your pick. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 20:58, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I have already added three additional in-depth articles about her life that have been printed since. WP:BEFORE helps when determining over time if someone continues to be notable. Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 21:43, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I reviewed your edits (diff 1, diff 2, recently diff 3). I admire your desire to stand me corrected and application of WP:BEFORE, but most of the sources, especially interviews (primary sources, indeed), you cited primarily covered her Survivor win. Also, I think I already addressed in the talk page the marginality of her notability especially as a medical student and someone engaged, didn't I?

I'm kinda unsure whether you were arguing to be bold and improve the article. Sure, improving the article would be a plausible rationale to keep the article. Nonetheless, even prettying up and adding some more stuff about her still won't prevent an article from being deleted or redirected, will they both? George Ho (talk) 03:38, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
(Should've realized and then linked essay WP:OVERCOME much earlier. George Ho (talk) 21:12, 19 July 2025 (UTC))[reply]

And just how many sources do you need before you believe a reality show winner is potentially notable despite the fact they have the win? It is pretty rare for someone to double down on such an argument, just not letting something ho... Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 03:41, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Why not multiple precedents, like the AFD discussion about the Survivor 43 winner and the AFD discussion about the 41 winner? Sure, they won, but that doesn't make them notable. As it turns out, (almost?) none of "New Era" (i.e. season-numbered era) winners are notable per policies and guidelines. I can provide more examples, like the AFD discussion about the Island of the Idols winner, but that's too plentiful, isn't it?

Due to plenty of Survivor winners being proven notable for just one event (WP:BIO1E or WP:BLP1E), almost none of further New Era winners have their own articles created or developed nowadays, and creating such articles is too risky anymore.

Sources aren't the only ones. Somehow, the Survivor contestants should typically have pre-Survivor notability (e.g. Keith Famie the chef) or gained some attention for activities besides appearing on Survivor (probably Helen Glover (Survivor contestant) due to losing her own newspaper column and hosting her own radio show). George Ho (talk) 04:01, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I tried a draft list of Survivor finalists, including winners, but an AFC volunteer rejected it as "arbitrary". Even the list of Survivor winners itself was deleted per this AFD discussion. George Ho (talk) 04:35, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ho ... Can you explain why you stated she is notable in the transcluded statement, and then reversed yourself? Quick, Spot the Quetzalcoatl! (talk) 03:42, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to say or imply that she's "notable". I just stated my concerns and that I've tried harder to verify her notability outside Survivor. Speaking of Survivor, she'll not appear on Survivor 50, unfortunately. George Ho (talk) 04:06, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 19:22, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How so? Checking the sources on the Wikipedia Library, the notability of her pre-Survivor career, despite its existence, isn't well verified by reliable sources. Also, I tried finding eligible reliable sources notability of her post-Survivor activity. All I can find are interviews, her engagement, and her status as a medical student, which is very brief to describe, honestly. Also, what about WP:SUSTAINED and WP:BIO1E? George Ho (talk) 21:01, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Per the other keep voters the sources are sufficient to pass GNG — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7080:393C:353:1E20:35FA:D6CE:9085 (talk) 22:35, 19 July 2025 (UTC) (This IP address was used by a blocked sockpuppet. —George Ho (talk) 19:35, 20 July 2025 (UTC))[reply]

A&A Records

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

The article has no reliable sources, appears to be unworthy of note, lacks any independent coverage, and is not on a topic of great publicity. Ziad0tarek952005 (talk) 18:15, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Companies, and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:22, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, possibly speedy keep. Satisfies GNG easily with significant coverage in many books and periodicals in Google Books, Google Scholar, Google News and the Internet Archive. It is not surprising this satisfies GNG, since it was the largest music retailer in Canada: [16]. To find all the sources, you need to search for both "A&A" (without spaces) and "A & A" (with spaces). Since the nominator removed both the independent reliable sources from the article without any explantion or any apparent good reason [17] [18] and then falsely claimed in this AfD that the article lacked independent reliable sources, and since valid content has been repeatedly removed many times without explantion or any apparent good reason from the article by IPs that geolocate to the country he claims on his userpage to come from (which appear to have been him, judging by their behaviour), and there have been complaints of blatant vandalism by other editors both for his account [19] and those IPs [20] [21], I think we might be able to infer that this nomination has been made for the purpose of vandalism and is a candidate for criteria 2 of WP:SK. James500 (talk) 21:34, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brenda Vongova

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

Fails WP:GNG. References either do not provide WP:SIGCOV or are not WP:INDEPENDENT. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:25, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Music, and Canada. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 09:25, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Brenda Vongova meets WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE criteria for notability. She has:
- Founded the UN Chamber Music Society, which has performed at the UN General Assembly and Carnegie Hall;
- Collaborated with international institutions such as the New York Philharmonic, UNESCO, and the Abu Dhabi Festival;
- Been profiled by reputable media sources including *Vogue*, *Newsweek*, *GRAMMY.com*, and *JNS*;
- Worked as a high-level UN civil servant in the Executive Office of the Secretary-General;
- Produced concerts and events in observance of UN-recognized days such as Holocaust Remembrance Day and World Arabic Language Day.
Her artistic and institutional impact has been recognized independently and internationally, establishing clear WP:SIGCOV and WP:INDEP coverage. The article can be improved with more inline citations and formatting, but the subject is clearly notable. MaddieBerry (talk) 10:07, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Working as a civil servant is an office job... Newsweek is not a reliable source. The rest of the comments suggest notability, but we have no sourcing in reliable sources. Oaktree b (talk) 13:45, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, and Women. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:04, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment in support of the nomination, here's my source assessment, which concludes that zero of the sources contribute to WP:GNG:

Source assessment table prepared by User:Curb Safe Charmer
Source	Independent?	Reliable?	Significant coverage?	Count source toward GNG?
http://hlrecord.org/advice-for-entertainment-lawyers-from-mark-gill-former-president-of-warner-independent-pictures/	Written by Vongova		Not about Vongova	✘ No
https://hlrecord.org/producer-discusses-michael-clayton/	Written by Vongova		Not about Vongova	✘ No
https://harvardcollegepianosociety.com/pianists	Was a member		Just an entry in the list of performers	✘ No
https://www.grammy.com/news/gold-music-alliance-recording-academy-aapi			Just a mention: "Attendees will enjoy a performance by the UN Chamber Music Society (Artistic Director, Brenda Vongova)"	✘ No
https://www.unchambermusic.org/	The subject is the president of the organization		Five paragraph profile of the subject	✘ No
https://www.passblue.com/2018/11/10/a-un-ensemble-whose-music-radiates-peace/	The subject was interviewed for this article		The subject tells the interviewer about her involvement with the UN Chamber Music Society and her work as a pianist	✘ No
https://www.un.org/en/ga/president/62/	The subject works for the UN		Subject is listed as assistant to the Spokesperson under the teams tab	✘ No
https://www.carnegiehall.org/Calendar/2020/01/27/UN-Chamber-Music-Society-Music-Therapy-Concert-with-Musicians-from-The-New-Yor-0730PM			Listed as a performer at the concert	✘ No
https://www.carnegiehall.org/Calendar/2022/05/02/UN-Chamber-Music-Society-Concert-for-Music-Therapy-with-Jerome-Lowenthal-Piano-0730PM			Listed as a performer at the concert	✘ No
https://www.un.org/en/delegate/music-peace-un-chamber-music-society	The subject works for the UN		Listed as a performer at the concert	✘ No
https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/14-july-un-chamber-music-society-resiliart-concert			Listed as a performer at the concert	✘ No
https://marciadesanctis.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Vogue-Sept-2015.pdf			One paragraph mentioning Vongova's 'Bumbum Lift' exercise	✘ No
https://www.un.org/en/delegate/movie-screening-oscar-winning-movie-flow	The subject works for the UN		In the running order for the event, "remarks will also be delivered by Brenda Vongova, President and Artistic Director of the UN Movie Society"	✘ No
https://www.cssd.ac.uk/news/shakespeare-at-the-un	Vongová has clearly been involved in this event		Video features her; mention "Organised by the United Nations Movie Society (whose president, Brenda Vongová studied at Central)"	✘ No
http://vongova.com/partnerships.html	On the subject's own website		Page of adverts by various brands collaborating with Vongova	✘ No
https://wanderwomandiaries.com/blog/travel-fitness	The blogger has known Vongova for years and is their personal fitness guru	Personal blog	five paragraphs describing a fitness routine developed by Vongova	✘ No
This table may not be a final or consensus view; it may summarize developing consensus, or reflect assessments of a single editor. Created using {{source assess table}}.

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 12:23, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Only sources I find are from the UN. As the table above shows, the sourcing isn't acceptable. Being covered in Newsweek and PassBlue (one of which is not a RS) isn't helping. Could potentially be notable, but we need sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 13:43, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Oaktree, thank you for your chart. I will collect more reliable sources accordingly to make this page better. I will defined revise it. Please give me some time, don’t delete it. Thank you. MaddieBerry (talk) 15:08, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
definitely * MaddieBerry (talk) 15:08, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete based on the above analysis of sources, which shows that she lacks significant coverage in reliable sources. The creator is a SPA solely devoted to making articles related to the UN indicative that they are involved with the UN. Many of the sources have been deprecated for years. I conducted several independent searches online and social media, although not required, and found nothing that could change my mind. I have no objection to letting this AfD be open for a few extra days. Bearian (talk) 11:07, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Karen Vardanyan

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

Searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage from independent, reliable sources to support meeting WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 01:10, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Armenia, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:32, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom.OPHYRIUS ^⚔ 04:38, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. A quick look at the translated Armenian wiki version of this article shows that the subject clearly meets WP:NPOL as a former member of the National Assembly of Armenia for the ARF party. [22] ⁂CountHacker (talk) 08:43, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Karen Vardanyan is a prominent Armenian businessman and philanthropist, actively involved in public life, including as the head of one of Armenia’s largest holding companies. There are numerous independent Armenian-language sources confirming his notability. I will help improve the article by adding the appropriate references.

Gbp190 (talk) 13:45, 15 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – Karen Vardanyan is a notable Armenian businessman and philanthropist, widely recognized in Armenia.

He is the CEO of the largest confectionery producer in Armenia and a prominent public figure. His contributions span across business and philanthropy. He has been covered extensively in reliable sources, including major Armenian news outlets.

Moreover, this article exists in both Armenian and Russian Wikipedias, which further supports his regional notability. The English article has been improved and now cites multiple independent and verifiable sources, demonstrating that the subject clearly meets Wikipedia’s WP:GNG.

Deleting the article would mean erasing the presence of a significant figure in Armenian economic and social life from the English-language encyclopedia.

- Conclusion: The article meets notability criteria and should be kept.

Anna Manasyan (talk) 11:12, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As noted above, sources exist in other languages including Russian and Armenian that establish notability. Some effort has already gone into adding these to the article. The formatting is bogus in several places, but that can be resolved outside of AfD.
Gbp190, there is a template at {{ill}} or Template:Interlanguage link. This will add both a red link for the en-wiki article and blue link to the article in another language. When another editor gets around to creating the red-linked article, it will then automatically turn into a regular wikilink. When you add sources in the standard source editor, templates need to be closed within curly braces to work. So <ref>{{cite web|...}}</ref> rather than <ref>cite web|...</ref>. You can also use the drop-down menu in the source editor's toolbard under "v Cite" and "Templates v"; this gives an easy form to fill out for the 4 most-used citation templates. Thanks for taking the time to track down sources and improve the article, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 00:37, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, could we get a formal source analysis to back up these Keep votes?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:43, 20 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Roboboa

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

I'm not convinced this toy robot meets WP:GNG. Article isn't much more than an unsourced summary of its functionality and has seen little improvement since 2008. A WP:BEFORE search revealed no significant coverage other than brief mentions of its announcement in 2007. MidnightMayhem 07:13, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: I only get two hits in Gnews. [23] I'm not sure that's a RS, but it was featured at CES, then appears to have faded away. Lack of sourcing. Non-notable item. Oaktree b (talk) 13:55, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products, Engineering, Technology, Hong Kong, and Canada. Skynxnex (talk) 16:22, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
1. Nichols, Larry (2008-07-25). "Robot pets do not poop". Philadelphia Gay News. Vol. 32, no. 30. p. 25. EBSCOhost 33550317.
  The abstract notes: "The article evaluates robotic pets from WowWee Robotics including Roboboa, the Alive series robots and the Robopanda."
2. Stone, Adam (2007-05-11). "Everything's Cool". Baltimore Jewish Times. Vol. 296, no. 2. pp. S22 – S23. ProQuest 222780229.
  The article notes: "Your Next Snake We promised you a snake, and now we deliver New from WowWee is the Roboboa, a robotic serpent that dances. Yep. They finally made a robot dancing snake. It's a beautiful world we live in. You can control the snake's 40 movements with a remote, or just crank the tunes and watch it dance to the music. It's also an iPod speaker, alarm clock and motion detector. We would just like to repeat these words one more time: Robotic, Dancing. Snake. For the robot-dancing-snake lover in all of us, could the world be any more cool? "
3. Schwarz, Reuben (2007-09-04). "Slinky bed mate". The Press. p. T7. ProQuest 314888094.
  The article notes: "Here's an alarm clock with a difference. Roboboa is alarm, reading light and electronic pet all rolled into one. It explores, it parties, it even guards your desk by shooting lasers (actually just a noise) at anything that comes into view. It also interacts with WooWees other toys, like Robopet and Robosapien, and probably scares the heck out of your pets. And it'll be that much harder sleeping in knowing a robot snake is staring down at you."
4. "These are the droids you're looking for: WowWee Roboboa". Stuff. 2008-01-01. Factiva FFUTS00020071207e4110000j.
  The article notes: "You’re probably wondering how this android snake gets about. In fact, Roboboa glides across flat surfaces with a curious moonwalk action courtesy of rotating cylinder segments. It all makes sense when you put him into Party Mode, whereupon he squirms around to his own disco tunes and puts on a little light show."
5. Le Bourlot, Éric (November 2007). "L'invasion des robots jouets" [The invasion of toy robots]. Science et Vie micro [fr] (in French). p. 11. Retrieved 2025-07-13 – via Internet Archive.
  The article notes: "Toujours inspirés par les travaux du chercheur au chapeau Mark Tilden, le Roboboa a la forme d'un ser- pent et le Roboquad est un drôle d'alien à quatre pattes. Tous deux peuvent se dépla-cer, repérer des obstacles. Mais attention, malgré ce qu'annonce Wow Wee, ils ne disposent pas d'une réelle intelligence artificielle, et si on peut leur inculquer certains comportements basi-ques, ils n'évoluent pas avec le temps."
  From Google Translate: "Still inspired by the work of hat-wearing researcher Mark Tilden, Roboboa is shaped like a snake, and Roboquad is a strange four-legged alien. Both can move and spot obstacles. But beware, despite what Wow Wee claims, they don't have real artificial intelligence, and while they can be taught certain basic behaviors, they don't evolve over time."
6. "Свестрана змиа" [Versatile snake]. Politikin Zabavnik (in Serbian). 2007-11-30. Retrieved 2025-07-13 – via Internet Archive.
  The article notes: "Свестрана змиа Argos Roboboa Стручнаци куе „Argos" осмислили су необичну роботизовану направу ко je савитльива попут змие да би била што прилагодливиа разним наменама и назвали су je Roboboa. Склопльена од дигиталних уреаа, ова „купна змиа" лако може да промени облик и изврши чак четрдесет едну радну. Тако, рецимо, Roboboa може да се користи као лампа за читанье, будилник, поуздани чувар кои бележи сваки покрет и о томе одмах обавештава, али и као саиграч кои добро прати ритам музике. Оваква свестрана направа заиста je пожельна у сваком домапинству. Може да се купи по цени од око 160 евра."
  From Google Translate: "Versatile snake Argos Roboboa Experts from the house "Argos" have designed an unusual robotic device that is flexible like a snake in order to be as adaptable as possible for various purposes and have called it Roboboa. Assembled from digital devices, this "snake" can easily change shape and perform as many as forty-one tasks. For example, Roboboa can be used as a reading lamp, an alarm clock, a reliable guard that records every movement and immediately informs about it, but also as a teammate that follows the rhythm of the music well. Such a versatile device is truly desirable in every household. It can be purchased for a price of around 160 euros."
7. Melanson, Donald (2007-10-15). "Roboboa slithers its way to the USA". Engadget. Archived from the original on 2021-01-23. Retrieved 2025-07-13.
  The article notes: "While WowWee's dancing Roboboa robot has already made its way into a few select parts of the world, those in the US have so far had a considerable harder time getting their hands on one. That looks to have now changed in a big way, however, as the so-called "alien with attitude" is now available directly from WowWee for an even $100."
There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Roboboa to pass Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria, which requires "significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject".
Cunard (talk) 08:58, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 09:32, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brace Yourself Games

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

Fails WP:CORPDEPTH, coverage of the company consists of trivial announcements and mentions. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:32, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games, Companies, and Canada. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:32, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its notability is connected to Ryan Clark, question is whether those Independent Games Festival nominations etc are sufficient for WP:NARTIST. IgelRM (talk) 14:03, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It does seem that Clark passes WP:NARTIST due to his primary role at the studio he founded, creating numerous notable games. However, I can't find any RS about him either. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:58, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its notability is also connected to its partnership with Nintendo on Nintendo's arguably best known IP. See, e.g., coverage from IGN, Inverse. Thewritestuff92 (talk) 20:57, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Cadence of Hyrule is unquestionably notable as a game given how incredibly rare it is for Nintendo to license their IP to an indie. However, that is not "inherited" by the studio. Given that it was essentially a one-off situation, it doesn't seem that the studio in itself is notable due to it. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 21:26, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 05:11, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Crypt of the NecroDancer. The studio's best known and most notable work, so any developer info would fit in the Development section. Go D. Usopp (talk) 10:03, 21 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vicky Huang

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

Unreferenced WP:BLP of an actress with no clear evidence of passing WP:NACTOR. As always, an actress is not automatically entitled to have an article just because there's a list of performances in it, and instead we have to see evidence of WP:GNG-worthy media coverage about her and her performances to deem her notable.
This is completely unreferenced, however, and the roles it lists were almost entirely supporting or bit parts rather than major starring roles — in either film or television, the only clear leading role named here is a short film rather than a feature or a television series, and the stage roles can't exactly be notability-making ones if they're so poorly sourceable that you're stuck denoting them solely as "lead vs. ensemble" and can't even name the specific characters she played.
Even on a ProQuest search, I'm finding virtually no useful sourcing that could be added: almost every hit I get is for either a real estate broker or a customer in a bridal shop, neither of whom can be verified as the same person as this at all, and the only hits I get that are clearly for an actress are glancing namechecks of her existence in theatrical calendar listings and an article about a photographer she once posed for rather than substantive coverage about her or any of her performances in anything.
Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to pass GNG on much better sourcing than I've been able to locate. Bearcat (talk) 21:03, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 21:03, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 22:46, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Old-AgedKid (talk) 07:02, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:31, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, regretfully, a search via DuckDuckGo also doesn't show any other evidence of significant coverage. Supporting roles in a few movies doesn't cut it, in regards to NACTOR. LightlySeared (talk) 13:04, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as I can't find any sourcing with a WP:BEFORE search. Roles mentioned in article don't seem rise to level of notability. Nnev66 (talk) 16:40, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we can't afford (literally) to have unsourced BLPs anymore. If someone wants to save this, do it this weekend. Bearian (talk) 20:28, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kevin McGarry (actor)

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

Semi-advertorialized WP:BLP of an actor, not properly referenced as passing WP:NACTOR. As always, actors are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they've had acting roles -- the notability test doesn't reside in listing acting roles, it resides in the quality and depth and volume of WP:GNG-worthy reliable source coverage that can be shown about him and his performances to support the article with.
But this is referenced principally to directory entries, podcast interviews, one of those garbage "celebrity net worth" PR profiles and content on the self-published production website of the show that constitutes his most potentially notable role, none of which is support for notability at all.
What there is for proper media coverage is one People magazine article that's focusing on his wedding rather than on the significance of his acting, an article in Us Weekly (which per WP:RSP is considered less reliable than People, and thus doesn't count as a strong GNG builder) that's doing the exact same thing, and a piece of "local guy does stuff" in the community news hyperlocal of his own hometown -- which doesn't add up to enough coverage to get him over GNG by itself if the article's sourcing is 85 per cent unreliable junk otherwise.
Just having been in television shows and films is not an automatic notability freebie without significantly better sourcing than this. Also there may be a WP:COI here, as the article was created by an WP:SPA with no history of contributing on any other topic. Bearcat (talk) 14:27, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 14:27, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep: Probably have enough for a basic article. He seems to be in a few popular tv shows. [24], [25], [26]. Enough for at least a basic article. Oaktree b (talk) 19:04, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I believe this article should be kept. Kevin McGarry is a notable Canadian actor best known for major roles on series like When Calls the Heart and Heartland, as well as in Hallmark Channel films. The article includes multiple reliable secondary sources, including Entertainment Tonight, Good Housekeeping, TV Insider, and Hallmark Channel. He meets Wikipedia’s notability criteria for actors through multiple significant roles and national media coverage. SU5MSJ (talk) 01:30, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Hallmark Channel's own self-published website about itself is not reliable or WP:GNG-building sourcing for the purposes of establishing the notability of an actor in Hallmark Channel programming, because it isn't independent coverage from a third party. TV Insider is a directory entry, not reliable coverage in GNG-building media or books. The Good Housekeeping and Entertainment Tonight sources you added, in an incorrect format that couldn't stay in the article, were both dead links that didn't lead to the content that you claimed they were leading to, but to "page not found" errors — and according to the headlines, neither of them appeared to be about Kevin McGarry, since they both pertained to something or somebody else, so even if they could be replaced with correct links they still wouldn't ensure Kevin McGarry's notability just because his name was in them. We're not looking for just any source you can find with his name in it, we're looking for sources that represent substantive coverage, written by journalists, in which Kevin McGarry is the primary subject of the source. Bearcat (talk) 19:29, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Response Regarding Kevin McGarry Article

Collapsed LLM text

Thank you for your feedback and for reviewing the article.

I understand and appreciate the importance of adhering to Wikipedia’s general notability guidelines (GNG) and the need for reliable, independent, third-party sources. I’d like to respectfully address the concern by pointing out the following:

Comparable Articles Exist: Kevin McGarry’s article structure, content, and sourcing are consistent with other existing articles about Hallmark actors, including castmates from When Calls the Heart such as Andrea Brooks, Kayla Wallace, and Pascale Hutton. These articles also rely heavily on press coverage tied to Hallmark programming, entertainment outlets, and interviews in niche media, which is often the only type of coverage available for actors primarily known through cable network franchises.
Multiple Roles and National Recognition: McGarry has had major recurring and lead roles on two long-running series—Heartland and When Calls the Heart—both broadcast in the U.S. and Canada, with strong international fan followings. His performances have been discussed and featured in interviews, podcast appearances, and video content, some of which are cited from Entertainment Tonight, Good Housekeeping, and TV Insider—all of which are considered credible sources when properly cited and linked. I acknowledge the links may have been outdated or formatted incorrectly, and I am actively working on correcting them.
Substantive Coverage: During When Calls the Heart Season 13, McGarry was the subject of over 5 million views’ worth of fan-driven and media content across platforms. He has also been featured in independent interviews such as those on Suspenders Unbuttoned Media, which—while not a legacy outlet—does meet standards of original reporting and interview content.
Willingness to Improve: I am committed to improving the sourcing. If you could advise on acceptable examples of substantive coverage that would help retain this article, I’d be grateful. I understand that passing GNG means more than name-drops—it requires in-depth, article-length pieces where McGarry is the focus, and I’m actively compiling those now.

Best regards,

User:SU5MSJ SU5MSJ (talk) 14:18, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Fan driven" and "interview" content does not establish notability, and neither does any number of views on any platform. We we require journalist-written content about him (which is not the same thing as content that happens to mention his name in the process of being about something else) in reliable sources, not social networking posts or interviews in which he's speaking about himself in the first person. Bearcat (talk) 20:44, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:51, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Further coverage in Good Housekeeping and Women's World [27] and [28]. We have enough to show ACTOR being met, the actor seems well-known among the Hallmark Channel fandom. Oaktree b (talk) 17:34, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: this is a prominent tv actor - the Good Housekeeping and Us Weekly coverage is legit RS. Llajwa (talk) 18:51, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support keeping the article. Kevin McGarry meets the criteria outlined in WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. He is the primary subject of multiple independent, reliable, secondary sources. Recent coverage includes: • Good Housekeeping (feature article about McGarry and his career) • Women’s World (profile piece focused on McGarry) • Us Weekly (relationship timeline and career discussion) • Cinemablend (interview discussing his role in When Calls the Heart)

These are all journalist-written, independent pieces that provide substantive coverage in which McGarry is the main focus—not just mentioned in passing. His leading roles in When Calls the Heart, Heartland, and numerous Hallmark films establish his notability as a prominent TV actor.

Additionally, I’ve been actively working on properly formatting and sourcing the article in accordance with Wikipedia’s standards. As this is my first article, I truly appreciate the feedback and guidance from more experienced editors, and I will continue to add sources and improve the article as I learn. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SU5MSJ (talk • contribs) 18:37, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: for policy based arguments
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:37, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for relisting the discussion. I’d like to reiterate that this article has been significantly improved since its initial nomination. It now includes multiple reliable, independent sources that provide substantive coverage of Kevin McGarry’s career—not just passing mentions.

Sources include interviews and articles from: TV Insider, The Toronto Star, The Kincardine Independent, Cineplex Magazine and Cinemablend

These publications meet the standards of WP:RS and support notability under WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. McGarry has had starring roles in long-running series such as When Calls the Heart and Heartland, and has been a leading actor in over a dozen Hallmark films. His theatre and early TV work has also been documented using third-party sources.

I’ve also taken care to properly format the citations, avoid non-reliable sources (e.g., IMDb, social media), and link the article to related Wikipedia entries to avoid orphaning.

I appreciate the opportunity to clarify and improve the article as I am new to this. I welcome any additional feedback to ensure it meets Wikipedia’s policies and standards. SU5MSJ (talk) 18:15, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I also modeled this page after other similar actors with similar credits and citations listed here on WIKI. SU5MSJ (talk) 18:23, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

please be mindful of badgering the discussion @SU5MSJ and let others' voices be heard. Star Mississippi 00:52, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s not my intention to badger, I thought I was encouraged to respond and continue to improve the article. Thanks for letting me know, I truly appreciate it. 2605:59C8:2136:4310:5CA2:FADC:1297:17FB (talk) 01:48, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

As already noted above, TV Insider is not a reliable or notability-building source — it's a directory entry, not third party coverage in media, so it doesn't count as a notability builder. Interviews also do not count as support for notability — they can be used for additional verification of facts after passage of GNG has already been covered off by stronger sourcing, but since they represent the subject talking about himself rather than being talked about by other people, they don't count as data points toward the initial question of whether the person has passed GNG in the first place. Bearcat (talk) 13:29, 19 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Association of Visual Language Interpreters of Canada

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

Declined prod. The added source is just a 1 quote from the president of CASLI. Fails WP:ORG for lack of SIGCOV. LibStar (talk) 23:42, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 23:44, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions. LibStar (talk) 23:45, 25 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:28, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I greatly improved the article. This association is the national, non-profit certifying body for professional American Sign Language-English, Quebec Sign Language-French interpreters in Canada. It's been active since 1979 and provides a crucial service which is notable. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 17:06, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
3 of the added sources are its own website and primary. LibStar (talk) 01:50, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Providing a "crucial service" is not a criterion for notability. LibStar (talk) 11:36, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Significant coverage has now been demonstrated spanning roughly four and a half decades, from publications across the country. This organization is a clear GNG pass, and more sources are likely to be found from here. MediaKyle (talk) 17:58, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: to assess source depth and independence
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 16:09, 3 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Per last relist comment.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 21:12, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A look at some of the sources. This one, this and this include a 1 line mentions and are not SIGCOV. LibStar (talk) 06:36, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This one merely confirms that Ontario Association of Sign Language Interpreters supports CASLI members. LibStar (talk) 06:42, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Did you look at the ones under Further reading? -- MediaKyle (talk) 10:25, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Hmm, seems Alright for a separate page unless disproven. BangladeshiEditorInSylhet (talk) 19:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please explain your vote "seems Alright". You don't seem to have addressed sourcing concerns. LibStar (talk) 23:42, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - the article has been sufficiently improved and expanded. Eulersidentity (talk) 23:44, 16 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist; sourcing concerns remain unaddressed. Bare assertions are unhelpful in achieving consensus when the sources have been challenged.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 22:32, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to highlight how far this article has come... Compare it now to when it was prodded here. Personally I think at this point it's on the nominator to tell us why all those new sources aren't sufficient. MediaKyle (talk) 00:08, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am counting 4 !keep votes above. I think this is a clear case of WP:HEY m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 00:24, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Here's a source analysis based on current state of article. Source 1 is its own website and primary. Source 2 appears to be a directory listing. Source 3 is a statement from the president of CASLI but does not seem to be actual coverage of CASLI. Sources 4 and 5, I need a page number to verify coverage and see actual text. Sources 7 and 8, need to see actual text quoted in this article about CASLI. Source 9 is not SIGCOV. Source 10 merely confirms OASLI is a member of CASLI. Source 11 is a 1 line mention of CASLI and not SIGCOV. On the basis of this I don't support keep. LibStar (talk) 00:36, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like you've cherry picked the primary sources out of this article and entirely disregarded the depth of academic coverage. How about these sources?
- Humphrey, Janice H. (1995). So You Want to Be an Interpreter: An Introduction to Sign Language Interpreting. H & H Publishing Company. p. 96. ISBN 978-0-9640-3673-4. Retrieved 17 July 2025 – via Archive.org. - This book features an entire section on the association beginning on page 96, section titled "The Establishment of the Association of Visual Language Interpreters of Canada"
- Stewart, David A.; Schein, Jerome D.; Cartwright, Brenda E. (1998). Sign Language Interpreting: Exploring Its Art and Science. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. ISBN 0-2052-7540-0. Retrieved 17 July 2025 – via Archive.org. - This book covers the association in-depth throughout, with particular detail starting on page 18, section titled "Association of Visual Language Interpreters of Canada (AVLIC)"
- Snoddon, Kristin; Wilkinson, Erin (2022). "The institutionalization of sign language interpreting and COVID-19 briefings in Canada". Translation & Interpreting Studies. 17 (3). American Translation & Interpreting Studies Association: 359–380. doi:10.1075/tis.21005.sno. - This article provides some actually quite critical scholarly analysis of the Association and their membership practices.
- Daly, Brad; Chovaz, Cathy J. (2020). "Secondary Traumatic Stress: Effects on the Professional Quality of Life of Sign Language Interpreters". American Annals of the Deaf. 165 (3): 353–367. ISSN 1543-0375. - This article covers the mental health issues facing CASLI interpreters, and provides commentary on the lack of support provided by the association and ways it could be improved.
Why are we only talking about the primary sources here? -- MediaKyle (talk) 00:52, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't cherry pick, I find that accusation offensive. I did ask for more information like page numbers and actual text that I couldn't verify. LibStar (talk) 00:54, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The only primary sources are from the CASLI website. LibStar (talk) 00:55, 18 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Canada proposed deletions

Senior General Counsel (via WP:PROD on 21 May 2025)

Canada speedy deletions

Canada redirect deletions

Canada file deletions

Canada template deletions

Canada category deletions

Canada miscellany deletions

Canada deletion review

Canada undeletion

Canada deletions on Commons

%