Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Canada

WP:CADTWP:CADT

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.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove 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:

Purge page cache

watch

Canada

Canada articles for deletion

Mitch and Murray Productions

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

Disputed drafification; WP:DRAFTOBJECT applies. Draftify on the basis that, with work, notability may be established. This has been moved too soon to mainspace, and the references are mainly information abut productions, and not about M&M productions. Fails WP:V 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 15:40, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople, Theatre, Business, and Canada. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 15:40, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. jolielover♥talk 16:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify or Delete, and Extended-Confirmed Protect - An article should speak for itself so that a reader will know, on reading the article, how the subject is notable, meaning that the article should identify what the significant coverage is. This page does not (because the author may have been more concerned with getting the article into mainspace than with completing the article). Protect the page so that it only goes back into article space when reviewed by an neutral editor. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:17, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment sorry my previous vote was for a different article and I switched too quickly between windows. I do think this should be deleted, but draftification is suitable and my prior comment doesn't apply. Sorry. SPOOKYDICAE👻 20:42, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and stubify or Draftify as it can be developed further for the mainspace. Checking the sources, the subject can meet required criteria with more improvements to the draft and a review by a neutral editor.Damiano (talk) 10:04, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or Draftify. I don't see anything in the recent version that ought to be deleted. -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:00, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tim Moen

AfDs for this article:

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

Delete or merge content sourced to secondary sources to Libertarian Party of Canada, per WP:NPOL. Moen has received some focused coverage from reliable sources, but they are limited to two stories without lasting significance: 1. His brief campaign sharing libertarian memes on online forums before and after he was elected the leader of the Libertarian Party, and 2. Him offering in 2017 to vacate the leadership so that Maxime Bernier could take over the party.

More important biographical details, such as those related to his activities, beliefs, goals, etc., are currently sourced entirely to primary sources. I could not find secondary coverage aside from those connected to the aforementioned stories. As Moen has never held public office, I do not believe he fits the second criteria of WP:NPOL, i.e. "Major local political figures who have received significant press coverage". Yue🌙 08:04, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Canada. Yue🌙 08:04, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Salmon n' Bannock

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

Nominated for deletion because this whole article reads like a giant ad (actually just now googling it, seems there are several other restaurants in Vancouver that have also given themselves promotional wikipedia articles, if someone feels like doing a bit of house cleaning) and apart from being one of only a handful of such restaurants in BC it's otherwise not notable, thus failing WP: Notability. Alternatively the article could be substantially condensed and merged with a larger article on Canadian indigenous cuisine, if one exists. Badharlick (talk) 18:34, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2025 October 31. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:46, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 19:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Business, and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete due to failing WP:CORP, eh? Tioaeu8943 (talk) 19:24, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Sources 13 and 28 talk about it, one is in a German media outlet, showing international notice. Should be more than enough with the other sourcing used. Oaktree b (talk) 19:36, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Also coverage here [1] and [2] Oaktree b (talk) 19:38, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This restaurant has surprisingly good coverage in secondary, published sources. Any peacocky language could be removed to keep the article neutral, but it is notable for a company. Yuchitown (talk) 15:13, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

NLL Team Capsules

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

These record tables are already on the individual team pages. This page isn't needed. It fails GNG or NLIST anyway. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 15:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Lists, Canada, and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:53, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:NLIST. I found that the information is already mentioned in the respective teams article. Fade258 (talk) 16:17, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Cannot pass WP:NLIST. ArvindPalaskar (talk) 05:51, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Video on Trial season 2

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

Almost all of the content on this page is built from the MuchMusic website which makes the show. In order to justify a split from the main article, we would need WP:SECONDARY coverage on this season. Otherwise its a WP:BADFORK.4meter4 (talk) 13:35, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 13:35, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It's more of a plot summary than anything, which you can make by watching the episodes. Article seems fine, one episode got an award nomination, that's notable. Oaktree b (talk) 13:54, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Oaktree b: we have an article on the series which covers the award. Why would we need a spinout on an individual season built almost entirely from WP:PRIMARY sources with no WP:SIGCOV? That doesn't seem to be a policy based decision.4meter4 (talk) 15:47, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be in the same model as every other episodic television series article on here, there's a template and everything. Oaktree b (talk) 19:23, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Or I suppose a redirect to List_of_Video_on_Trial_episodes would be fine Oaktree b (talk) 19:33, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:54, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The model is fine as long as there are sources covering the season as a whole or parts of the season in SECONDARY sources. The Sopranos season 2 for example cites many by-lined newspapers articles. It's fine to build this type of page as long as it is not predominantly sourced to primary materials. Best.4meter4 (talk) 21:28, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom and failing WP:CSC. Tioaeu8943 (talk) Tioaeu8943 (talk) 18:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Enghouse Networks

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

This run-of-the-mill telecommunications company has effectively no coverage - I draftified this article when I first saw it, but it was moved back into mainspace by the author without improvement. All we have here is the typical list of acquisitions followed by a description of their products - nothing rising to the level of depth required for NCORP. We have no room for more brochures. MediaKyle (talk) 13:27, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Canada. MediaKyle (talk) 13:27, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Corcym

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

This article was declined at Draft:Corcym and then copy-pasted into mainspace by the author. This is a relatively small medical device company and I don't think any of the coverage here rises to the level of NCORP. The article appears to be more of a covert advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. MediaKyle (talk) 13:04, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Medicine, Technology, Italy, and Canada. MediaKyle (talk) 13:04, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Very PROMO, with only scattered mentions in PR items [ https://www.leadersleague.com/en/news/andrea-mandelli-corcym-a-general-counsel-is-not-just-a-legal-advisor-but-a-strategic-partner-to-the-business]. The two and three are mentions of the company, not articles about it. Oaktree b (talk) 13:57, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. I rewrote this article from scratch and removed all promotional language, peacock terms, and marketing-style content. YWI YentelWissink (talk) 16:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. I reworked it. It is now based on multiple, high-quality, independent, secondary sources that provide significant coverage, including: Peer-reviewed publications,In-depth industry journals (MedTech Dive, Diagnostic and Interventional Cardiology)and reliable corporate data. Is there anything else I have to adjust? YWI YentelWissink (talk) 16:33, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Devon station (Ontario)

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

Unsourced for 15 years, the "station" is an empty rail crossing with zero notion of notability. Should be redirected to The Canadian, the train that passes through that spot. Cards84664 02:27, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Nothing but original research. Flag stops like this that have no physical infrastructure do not merit articles. A trout is in order for the person who contested the redirect. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:32, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Stations and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:28, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Once notable, always notable. The article makes clear that the station once had significant infrastructure. This station is not served by The Canadian, although it might once have been when The Canadian was operated by Canadian Pacific. Today, it is served by Sudbury – White River train, as the article explains. See https://geonames.nrcan.gc.ca/search-place-names/unique?id=FDJPH Devon (the community) is also notable in its own right. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 13:13, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, we need sourcing that shows any of this, not just a name on a map. "Might have been" isn't quite notable. Oaktree b (talk) 14:08, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article makes clear that the station once had significant infrastructure. It says nothing about a physical station, actually. Please reread the article and show me where it says anything about a physical station building ever being present. If you want to write an article about the community, be my guest, but that requires actually finding sources that prove its notability, not just hits in a database. You seem to think people don't understand that notability isn't time dependent (something formerly notable is still notable), but that's not the case - you're either intentionally misrepresenting both the nomination and the article, or you're just being tone-deaf in a rush to immediately demand a keep because it aligns with your personal beliefs. Either show up with actual sources (the database hit doesn't count) or stop wasting community time with foolish votes like this. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 17:44, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This is not a heritage railway station, it's a sign post. Could be notable with sourcing, but we don't have anything to show notability. As it is now, it's a photo of a railway crossing and primary sourcing... That's not what we need for an article here. Oaktree b (talk) 14:07, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Sudbury–White River train. Here's what Via Rail's page says: "Please note that this location is not a station, it is a sign post (a stop on request area)."^[3] --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 19:44, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nomination and A. B. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:33, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't know how to read, redirect to Sudbury–White River train instead of The Canadian. This stop is along the former route of The Canadian. Cards84664 19:56, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Video on Trial season 1

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

Article on a television series that lists the TV series itself as its source. Fails WP:GNG.4meter4 (talk) 02:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. 4meter4 (talk) 02:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:26, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Honestly the TV show itself has dubious notability. Olliefant (she/her) 17:08, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elias Huminicki

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

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this young curler. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC. JTtheOG (talk) 22:14, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Canada. JTtheOG (talk) 22:14, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I was going to suggest a merge to Team Jordan McDonald, but I don't think that's notable. Articles I pull up are only about him playing on the Team. Oaktree b (talk) 23:47, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
KeepWithin WikiCurling, the level of notability for curlers to have a wikipedia page I've attached along the side as shortcuts. Both Elias and Cameron meet 2 of these criteria through medalling at Canadian Juniors, participating in Grand Slam of Curling events, and at the Canadian Olympic Curling Trials as one of the top 8 teams in Canada. The reason why in Curling leads and seconds do not have many independent articles about them as much media coverage is focused on the Skip/Captain, however they would still meet this level of notability that was agreed upon. If this gets overruled and deleted, I am ok with it, however there are many less notable curlers in terms of achievements in the sport, as well as all players who play lead/second who have the same level of detail articles are written on, who still have wikipedia pages, so I think this needs to be applied equally.
Shortcuts
WP:NCURLWP:NCURL
WP:NCURLINGWP:NCURLING
Traveltheglobe (talk) 00:49, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I hadn't realized WP:NCURLING existed, but, by these standards, he seems notable, though an actual showing of WP:SIGCOV still has to be made. I continue to think we should keep it. Bruhpedia (talk) 01:26, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruhpedia: NCURLING, along with the rest of the WP:NSPORT guidelines, were deprecated in 2022 following a lengthy discussion. It was correctly determined, just as you did yourself, that the NSPORT guidelines were not in fact accurate predictors of meeting the WP:GNG. The top of the NSPORT page now reads: The article should provide reliable sources showing that the subject meets the general notability guideline. JTtheOG (talk) 02:17, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fair point. It seems that they're a valid way to establish a presumption of notability, but you still need to make an actual showing of WP:SIGCOV. Maybe that wasn't followed prior to 2022. Bruhpedia (talk) 19:14, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Bruhpedia: Yeah. Prior to then, one-sentence stubs on athletes were allowed to supersede GNG by simply playing 2 or 3 minutes in the Moldovan Liga or Ukrainian Second League. The extremely large amount of articles of this type resulted in a backlash from the wider Wiki community, followed by the discussion I linked above and the subsequent changes to the guidelines. JTtheOG (talk) 19:38, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: By the standards of curling, he seems notable. An equivalently-experienced player in a more popular sport would clearly be notable, curling just doesn't get much coverage. There are lots of intrasite links and sources, seems like a pretty good article. Bruhpedia (talk) Bruhpedia (talk) 00:51, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Has played in a Grand Slam event (the highest level of competitive curling), and will be in the Canadian Olympic Curling Trials.-- Earl Andrew - talk 05:25, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Surely the Olympics followed by the World Championships are the highest level of curling not a Grand Slam event? Anxioustoavoid (talk) 22:58, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
True, but the skill level is on par, if not better, since the slams aren't limited to one team per country.-- Earl Andrew - talk 20:18, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cameron Olafson

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

I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV for this young curler. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC. JTtheOG (talk) 22:06, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Canada. JTtheOG (talk) 22:06, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Within WikiCurling, the level of notability for curlers to have a wikipedia page I've attached along the side as shortcuts. Both Elias and Cameron meet 2 of these criteria through medalling at Canadian Juniors, participating in Grand Slam of Curling events, and at the Canadian Olympic Curling Trials as one of the top 8 teams in Canada. The reason why in Curling leads and seconds do not have many independent articles about them as much media coverage is focused on the Skip/Captain, however they would still meet this level of notability that was agreed upon. If this gets overruled and deleted, I am ok with it, however there are many less notable curlers in terms of achievements in the sport, as well as all players who play lead/second who have the same level of detail articles are written on, who still have wikipedia pages, so I think this needs to be applied equally.

Shortcuts

Traveltheglobe (talk) 00:58, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Has played in a Grand Slam event (the highest level of competitive curling), and will be in the Canadian Olympic Curling Trials.-- Earl Andrew - talk 05:25, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Participation-based notability criteria for athletes were deprecated in 2022. JTtheOG (talk) 06:05, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agendrix

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

This appears to be a brochure for a relatively run-of-the-mill company - only been around for ten years, all we have under "History" is your typical funding announcements and subsequent acquisition by The Citation Group. I don't think anything here satisfies the depth of sourcing required. MediaKyle (talk) 13:58, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Software, and Canada. MediaKyle (talk) 13:58, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Only routine business announcements found; fails WP:NCORP. WeirdNAnnoyed (talk) 21:37, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete globe and mail and similare are definitely routine announcements, nothing to pass NCORP. Never-ending string (talk) 11:21, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article satisfies WP:ORGCRIT, WP:CORPDEPTH, and WP:GNG, and is fully consistent with WP:NCORP. The company has received significant, independent, and analytical coverage from multiple reliable sources, including L’actualité, La Tribune and Le Nouvelliste. These articles provide in-depth business analysis over several years (2020–2025), which goes well beyond the non understandable “routine announcements” mentioned in the votes above. When the references are actually reviewed, they clearly meet Wikipedia’s sourcing and depth criteria for organizational notability.--Jean-PierreCL (talk) 14:39, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Maquila Solidarity Network

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

Minor Canadian-based advocacy organization. I came across the article while cleaning up high-frequency LLM article expansions from a new editor. The LLM-expanded version had 5 sources, 4 of which were associated with the MSN organization itself, and 4 of which (including the only "independent" source) did not exist. The pre-LLM version (which I reverted the article to) has no sources. I searched in both English and Spanish and found quite a few hits but no sources meeting WP:ORGCRIT. The closest were these [4][5] but I don't think either is particularly close. NicheSports (talk) 04:51, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations, Politics, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:03, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Some mentions in various universities [6], [7], [8], but that's about all that comes up. Lack of sourcing. Oaktree b (talk) 19:58, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete only mentions in not notable sources; lack of independent notable source. Never-ending string (talk) 14:20, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: though seeing plenty of returns from casual searching, lacks SIGCOV to suggest notability.Lorraine Crane (talk) 01:47, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Niakwa Place School

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

Article about an elementary school, not reliably sourced as passing inclusion criteria for schools. As always, schools are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to show WP:GNG-worthy coverage about them, in reliable sources, to show that they've been the subject of independent third-party attention by somebody other than themselves. But this is referenced entirely to primary sources, namely its profile on the website of its own school division and a coil-bound (i.e. self-printed, and not professionally edited or commercially published) booklet written by a former employee, which are not support for notability, and not a single GNG-building source has been cited at all. Bearcat (talk) 16:47, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 16:47, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or selective merge to Winnipeg#Education or List of schools in Winnipeg. Bearian (talk) 00:35, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Z E T A³ 17:32, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.‎

The result was soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:07, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Milos Zivkovic (Canadian football)

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

This an article on someone who went undrafted in the 2009 CFL draft. I need say no more. All I found was this. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 14:49, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and American football. ~WikiOriginal-9~ (talk) 14:50, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I found this. Probably could use more. NotJamestack (talk) 15:41, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 15:50, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I found an additional ref which I added to the article. Milos Zivkovic gets decent coverage (239 words) in a much longer article about BC's Simon Fraser University joining the American NCAA. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 22:27, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,

Salvio giuliano

18:46, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:GNG Agnieszka653 (talk) 00:53, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

2016 Canadian honours

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

Wikipedia as not catalog. Every country has various minor military and civil decorations and awards issued to hundreds of people. Usually we do not list nonnotable people in wikipedia article. Not to say it is based solely on WP:PRIMARY sources. --Altenmann >talk 21:30, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 21:44, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: There's no links for most of these people listed, so I don't see the need for a list. Oaktree b (talk) 22:28, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - this is a useful list for the most senior honors. I'm happy to cut this back and tighten up the inclusion standards to only list the most senior awards. Let me know what you all think.--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs • global count)} 22:46, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Just put the lists of notable persons into articles by notable awards and do not need sort by year. I didnt pay attention you have may other yearly lists. I will nominate all of them shortly. --Altenmann >talk 02:33, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:03, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: These articles need to be cleaned up, not deleted. Canadian honours is very obviously a notable topic, and is discussed in great detail across a wide variety of publications, online and print. The question is where the scope of the articles should end - and that's not a question to be decided at AfD. Please note that we have about 20 years worth of these articles, this isn't the only one... I quite frequently check them myself. I would suggest that some discussion be had regarding coming up with a solution that makes the entire lot better, rather than getting rid of this single year. MediaKyle (talk) 21:32, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- If an individual honor is notable, it deserves an article. Please cite sources which discuss "2016 canadian honors" as a separate subject. --Altenmann >talk 21:59, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The article has been reported by multiple reliable, secondary news networks:

[9] (CBC News)

[10] (The Canadian Press) Imperatorhobbes (talk) 02:48, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

False. Both refs are specifically about the Order of Canada, not about "Canadian honours" in general. --Altenmann >talk 03:22, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Which is a smaller section of the article subsumed within the greater article. I suppose you could change the topic to "2016 Order of Canada Honours", but that far less broad. Imperatorhobbes (talk) 13:04, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Just notifying @Ctjj.stevenson, the creator of this article) Imperatorhobbes (talk) 13:26, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Clean-up and keep: I agree with MediaKyle here that there needs to be a lot of clean-up, but it is notable for important honours. The question is really which ones need to be removed, but that isn't in the scope of AfDs Rhinocrat^t _c 15:12, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep satisfies NLIST; not every member of a list has to be notable for the list itself to be notable. Agree that cleanup required, but that's not the point of AfD. Regards, --Goldsztajn (talk) 04:29, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - agree with others that this satisfies the basic elements of a list article. It could be improved with individualized citations to each honour and member, however it does not appear to be necessary when looking through the various British Honour Lists (see: random selections 2006, 1932). - Caddyshack01 (talk) 01:19, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Why just this one and not all the others in Category:Canadian honours by year and similar lists for other countries? Clearly satisfies WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:39, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Other Canada Deletions

Canada proposed deletions

List of premiers of Alberta by time in office (via WP:PROD on 3 November 2025)
List of joint premiers of the Province of Canada by time in office (via WP:PROD on 3 November 2025)
Semacode (via WP:PROD on 2 November 2025)

Canada speedy deletions

Canada redirect deletions

Canada file deletions

Canada template deletions

Canada category deletions

Category:Games of basketball teams in Canada 2025-10-21
Category:Canadian women by role 2025-10-17

Canada miscellany deletions

Canada deletion review

Canada undeletion

Canada deletions on Commons

%