Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Canada

Canada

Canada articles for deletion

Voyageurs Cup (women)

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

Clearly fails WP:GNG, i.e. has not "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". The main source of information for this topic is a fan blog (hosted by the University of Toronto CS department) which is the primary source and not establish notability. The lone secondary source (The Equalizer) does acknowledge the existence of a competition but the extent of the details is limited to this single sentence: "A brief attempt to create a women’s version ended after a couple season’s when the logistics of it became too difficult to manage." BLAIXX 02:24, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. BLAIXX 02:24, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. RedPatch (talk) 03:02, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Redirect to Voyageurs Cup Not independently notable. If it gets brought back in the future with the growth of the women's game in Canada, then maybe it can be created, but for now as a trophy that was awarded for three years and lastly in 2006, the current section in the other article is sufficient. RedPatch (talk) 03:00, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Unlike for the men, there's no evidence (not even on the blog) that a trophy was actually awarded. I'm not even sure if the teams were aware that they had "won" something. BLAIXX 03:09, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Awards and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:49, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Veterans Coalition Party of Canada

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

Fails WP:ORG: Defunct political party that during its history achieved insignificant election results (0.03% at its peak in 2019) and had no presence outside of elections. Independent coverage is limited to routine election-cycle coverage and does not go in-depth about the party and its activities. Yue🌙 00:47, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Organizations, Politics, and Canada. Yue🌙 00:47, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Robert Marc Nelson

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

WP:BLP of a lawyer and author, not properly referenced as passing inclusion criteria for lawyers or authors. As always, notability doesn't hinge on the things the article says, it hinges the quality and depth and WP:GNG-worthiness of the referencing that's used to support the things it says -- people don't get articles for having had jobs, they get articles for having had their work in those jobs covered and analyzed as significant by third party reliable sources, such as media and books. But this is referenced almost entirely to content self-published by companies or organizations the subject was directly affiliated with, which are not support for notability, and the only media source present at all is a single article of the "local man does stuff" variety in the community hyperlocal of an individual city neighbourhood, which is not enough to get him over GNG all by itself if it's all he's got for third party coverage.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have better referencing than just primary sources created by his own employers. Bearcat (talk) 19:26, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors, Law, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 19:26, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: He was in charge of the ADR institute of Canada, a national organization, and described as one of the leading experts in his field. His book, Nelson on ADR, is cited as being "the most comprehensive guide on ADR," and is taught at major institutions around Canada. He also taught courses all around the world, passing notability for academics. Additionally he was responsible for introducing ADR to Russia and Albania, and introducing new legislation in Albania. He opened the ADR center in Tehran was cited as being "widely covered" in Albanian media. He also acted before the Supreme Court of Canada in the landmark case Rodriguez v. British Columbia AG. From all that, I infer him to be notable and passing the guidelines. PD8 (talk) 19:52, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Leading an organization is not an instant notability freebie, if the article isn't supported by WP:GNG-worthy reliable source media coverage about that work. Appearing before the Supreme Court of Canada on a case is not an instant notability freebie, if the article isn't supported by GNG-worthy reliable source media coverage about that work. Writing a book is not an instant notability freebie, if the article isn't supported by GNG-worthy reliable source media coverage about that work.

And on and so forth: it's not the job titles he's had that establish the notability, it's the amount of GNG-worthy reliable source media coverage that he has or hasn't received about his work that establishes the notability. An article cannot be supported by content self-published by the subject and his own employers — it has to be supported by third party coverage about him in media that he didn't have personal editorial control of. Bearcat (talk) 20:05, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Subject Fails Basic GNG and does not show notability to be included in an encyclopedia. Leading an organization is not an instant notability freebie - I support this.

Adrianna Edwards

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

Mostly mentions, interviews, or coverage in unreliable sources. Fails WP:GNG. Gheus (talk) 19:09, 13 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, Women, and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 19:17, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Source 4 is a RS, but that's about all there is. I'm not sure sources 6 and 7 help add to notability, her "loving a fight scene" seems like celebrity fluff. Those are about all I can find as well. Doesn't seem to meet musical notability with no charted singles, no awards and hardly any critical notice of her work other than source 4 as explained. Oaktree b (talk) 19:28, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I couldn't find any more sources regarding her past promotional pieces or unreliable sources. MayhemStoppingBy (talk) 19:38, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Further to the RS coverage identified above, there are two further WP:RSMUSIC sources including Mixmag and a bylined single review in DJ Mag. Furthermore, both Magnetic Mag and EDM Identity have feature articles with bylined coverage (as well as curated interviews): Magnetic Mag & EDM Identity. I am not sure this is a clear delete yet. ResonantDis_tortion 22:03, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PAL Airlines Flight 2259

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

Non-notable accident. All that happened is the airport closed for 90 minutes. This is a pretty common occurrence throughout Canada and I can, if required give several examples, one that affected former prime minister Stephen Harper ("CADORS report for Kenn Borek (GKBP)". Transport Canada.).

While Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Aircraft accidents and incidents, in particular (Airline and airport articles, is just advice on what should be included it is a reasonable guide to inclusion. There is no indication in the article that the accident meets any of the guidelines. CambridgeBayWeather (solidly non-human), Uqaqtuq (talk), Huliva 15:29, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Canada. Shellwood (talk) 16:22, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NEVENT given the complete absence of continued coverage or lasting impact on anybody. There was a rough landing, and it was slightly dramatic, but nothing I'd expect to be even worth mentioning a few months after the accident. All the coverage is WP:ROUTINE, and (best I can see) didn't even continue into 2025. I don't see a point in even mentioning this at the PAL Airlines, where the information is present but tagged for being undue. I also don't see a point in mentioning it at Halifax Stanfield International Airport, where it's mentioned in a sentence. (IMO both mentions should be removed, but I won't do that while the AfD in in progress) GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 16:37, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
About any mention in 2025, I think it is clear that if the Transportation Safety Board of Canada released any news about it, it will be mentioned again. I agree with you that I failed the Wikipedia notability, but I also agree with User:SportingFlyer that, like I said, it will be mentioned again when it is newsworthy. As they're still investigating, I think we should wait until they finally released their report, and see how the media react. Ohok12 (talk) 17:44, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, the incident itself is absolutely newsworthy, and you're quite right that there will likely be some, limited, coverage when the final report gets released. But Wikipedia is WP:NOTNEWS. To keep this article, I'd want sources some distance from the event itself that analyse the impact it had on the world. So sort of beyond an "X government released Report Y that said the accident was caused by Z". What does the accident mean for the world? Did it cause any major changes in laws or regulations, did it kill several notable people did it have implications for international relations, did it achieve any form of cultural significance? A simple incident like this... they don't typically tend to get sources that give that sort of coverage. Never say never, of course, but this particular incident wasn't intentional, nobody died and the newspapers lost interest very quickly. GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🦋 22:04, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to PAL Airlines and keep a mention here. Also, if this becomes newsworthy again, it should be able to be quickly restored. SportingFlyer T·C 16:41, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the author, for me, the aircraft suffered substantial damage, which basically has followed the second rule of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Aircraft accidents and incidents: "The accident involved hull loss or serious damage to the aircraft or airport; or". Ohok12 (talk) 17:28, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:57, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I think landing gear failure incidents have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis. Whilst I think the RED Air one is just notable enough to be kept, I don't think this one is. 11WB (talk) 20:24, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete : This article is not notable at all. It has no sustain coverage. It was a minor accident with no injuries or fatalities. I have not seen any reporting on this accident since December. Zaptain United (talk) 03:27, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that I can’t compare this with fully-investigated cases, as the TSBC didn’t release any piece of information about this, we cannot ensure is this REALLY unnoticeable or not. In addition, I don’t think this just some minor incident, as with that said, JetBlue Flight 292 and Air Serbia Flight 324 should also be minor incidents. However, like you have said, I agree with you that this has no sustain coverage and also I didn’t have any information about it since December 2024. With the fact that this is Wikipedia:NOTNEWS, it is apparent that your statement is valid in most of the points. Ohok12 (talk) 10:03, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly it's probably time for a broader discussion of what makes an air crash notable as more important incidents don't lead to the complete loss of the aircraft. I don't think this quite reaches the bar yet but there also hasn't been a final investigation. SportingFlyer T·C 10:24, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:NEVENT, An event is presumed to be notable if it has lasting major consequences or affects a major geographical scope, or receives significant non-routine coverage that persists over a period of time. Coverage should be in multiple reliable sources with national or global scope. Aviationwikiflight (talk) 10:37, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
With that said, it still kinda have some question about it, Example:

- When comparing Flight 2259 and Flight 324, they popularity were the same. The difference is that Flight 2259 was more serious than Flight 324. I don’t know do you agree with that, but that just my opinion.

- There were literal crashes (such as Azimuth flight A45051, Red Air Flight 203) were considered as “unnotable” while some incidents (such as AS Flight 2059, Ryanair 4978, Delta Flight 89) were known as notable. It makes a paradox that some unusual, but minor issues were notable, and serious issues were not noticeable. In my opinion, like User:SportingFlyer has said, we should make a discussion whether a plane incident is notable. Ohok12 (talk) 11:37, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NEVENT is incredibly ambiguous about these airline incident edge cases, hence the need for a discussion. SportingFlyer T·C 12:02, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just a question, how is WP:NEVENT ambiguous for events like this? Aviationwikiflight (talk) 14:49, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Examples:

- Delta Air Lines Flight 89, I don't see any long-lasting impact for this incident (like no one died, the media found it no more newsworthy, it just like a silly mistake though having the expert response)

- CommutAir Flight 4933, I don't know why is this approved to be page as is just a normal incident (like overshooting the runway is the thing that many of us saw, though it was written off)

- JetBlue Flight 191, until now, I don't why is it still count as the plane wasn't damaged, only having personal impact

I think this is enough to see the confusion of the Wikipedia:Notability (events). If it isn't because of it, then it may be the Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Aircraft accidents and incidents. Ohok12 (talk) 16:18, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Halifax Stanfield International Airport#Accidents and incidents, as is standard for relatively minor incidents such as this that do not have lasting coverage. This is, in my opinion, a good alternative for deletion, as it does allow for the restoration of the page if there is additional information or coverage in the future. nf utvol (talk) 12:59, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for still trying to keep this page in some way. Ohok12 (talk) 14:45, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As the author of this page, I don't disagree with the fact that this incident didn't meet 100% of the Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Aircraft accidents and incidents, so many experienced editor wants to delete this page. For me:

- Though I do want to keep this page, but if it because of the community good, I agree to delete this page or making it as a draft.

- I'm also an inexperienced editor, which can made many mistakes during the creation.

Nevertheless, it doesn't mean that I want to delete this page:

- The Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Aircraft accidents and incidents describe very vaguely about notable incident.

- This is an undergoing-investigating case, so we can't sure whether this is really a normal incident or a serious incident.

With that, I think we should create a talk page or a discussion to sort out normal incident and notable incident.
Also, thank you for the contribution.

Umashankar Kannaiyan

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

Non-notable music producer. Article is filled with links to social media sites (and to IMDb, which is unreliable). Subject appears to lack coverage from reliable sources, and fails WP:NPRODUCER and WP:NCOMPOSER. Could be eligible for speedy deletion under A7. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:56, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians, India, and Canada. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:56, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tamil Nadu-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:15, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per the nomination. Taabii (talk) 14:54, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete: No reliable source. Zuck28 (talk) 17:40, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Sources are unreliable as per the original nominator's concerns. MayhemStoppingBy (talk) 19:18, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Revised for Wikipedia policy compliance: updated references to reliable sources, removed social media, IMDb references, removed non-Independent links, clarified sourcing. Glissundo (talk) 23:46, 13 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. [1] ⁂CountHacker (talk) 08:43, 13 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. [2] 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]

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]

Tʼuyʼtʼtanat-Cease Wyss

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

Fails WP:GNG and WP:ARTIST. The sources are all primary, not independent, or interviews and results of the search were the same. 🄻 🄰 13:37, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Switzerland, and Canada. 🄻 🄰 13:37, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:26, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no WP:SIGCOV to be found. Per nom, the sources in the page are mostly interviews, and a Google search brings up no better results. Broc (talk) 14:33, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't checked the other sources yet, but I've done a search in Swissdox and this person has zero coverage in Swiss media. Toadspike [Talk] 15:42, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably the first sentence is about heritage, not nationality. I would not expect Swiss media to cover an artist focused on local British Columbian art. Yue🌙 08:00, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree; I just thought it might be helpful to other editors to know that she hasn't been covered in Swiss media, even though she has been described as "Swiss" [3]. I purposely did not cast a bolded !vote on this basis due to the many other sources in the article, which I have not yet assessed.

Side note: It is exceedingly odd that "Swiss", which is not a nationality or ethnicity, is listed alongside "Squamish, Stó:lō, Kanaka Maoli, Irish-Métis", which are. Toadspike [Talk] 09:07, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The artist is clearly notable by the references: Canadian Art, the Vancouver Art Gallery, the Morris and Belkin Gallery, National Film Board, Jack and Doris Shadbolt Foundation, etc. Those aren't negligible distinctions. Curiocurio (talk) 13:56, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep: Frankly, I’m baffled this is even up for deletion. Tʼuyʼtʼtanat-Cease Wyss is a nationally recognized artist with deep institutional backing: Canadian Art, the Vancouver Art Gallery, Belkin, the National Film Board, the Shadbolt Foundation, and yes—she’s catalogued by the National Gallery of Canada. That alone satisfies WP:ARTIST and WP:GNG. Claims that the sources are “just interviews” or “not independent” are lazy and inaccurate. These are respected, curated publications, standard fare for evaluating artists. This nomination feels out of touch with how notability works for contemporary artists, especially Indigenous ones. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 14:11, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Being catalogued by the National Gallery of Canada does not satisfy WP:ARTIST, she is not "represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums." 🄻 🄰 14:23, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Distinctive Software

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

Fails WP:NCORP. I suggest a redirect/merge to EA Vancouver, which does appear notable (albeit largely under its former EA Canada name) ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:33, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Companies. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:33, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:52, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with EA Vancouver: Both articles seem to all but acknowledge as it is that Distinctive Software is what EA Canada/EA Vancouver was called when the studio was not yet owned by EA. That does not necessarily require two articles, especially if independent notability for one incarnation is lacking. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 02:56, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Serenity Cox

AfDs for this article:

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

Contested WP:BLAR by @A person of sorts: (your edit summary was cut off, by the way - feel free to explain further here). After removing a bunch of policy failures (see my edit summaries), I'm not seeing how this meets WP:GNG; a WP:BEFORE search shows only interviews. Laun chba ller 15:55, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Serenity is prominent figure within her industry and heavily featured and quoted on both AVN and XBIZ (online and print) frequently which are both reliable sources. As mentioned in that post, with these basically being the only "reliable" industry publications if we reject them there would not be much we could write about in the adult industry. (SanDiegoDan (talk) 14:18, 8 July 2025 (UTC))[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Sexuality and gender, and Canada. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:00, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:22, 7 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.

I thank you for setting this discussion up and being willing to hear me out. The one point I missed that I do not contest the removal of the LADBible and Daily Mail articles - they are not reliable and I acknowledge my mistake.

As User:SanDiegoDan mentioned before, AVN itself is acknowledged as a reliable source. Not sure about XBIZ but I believe it is as well. The articles provided are frequently about Cox and not just interviews. As of current revision, citations 4, 8, 11, 14, 17, 24, among others are not reliant on interviews. This proves notability in the frequency, reliability, and verifiability of the citations provided. A person of sorts (talk) 18:38, 8 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]

Anne-Marie Losique

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

nn Canadian TV producer --Altenmann >talk 21:09, 3 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, Businesspeople, Women, Television, and Canada. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:12, 4 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete have yet to find any SIGCOV for the subject.Lorraine Crane (talk) 17:05, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The only thing I can find SIGCOV for her is a WP:BLP1E event related to a Ben Affleck interview in 2004, and again in 2017 when the incident went viral again. Apparently the video is quite controversial and goes viral when it resurfaces. She is the interviewer and has defended him after it was taken out of context. Curiously there is nothing in the article that makes note of this event. Nayyn (talk) 22:00, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article has been expanded in these edits with new sources and translated content from the French Wikipedia article. There is a lot SIGCOV available on her, especially French-language news coverage, including coverage of career developments or reviews of her TV programs in Le Journal de Montréal, Canoe.ca, and La Presse, which are now cited in the article. In particular, this in-depth profile from Maclean's magazine and this profile and Nathalie Petrowski's critiques [4][5] in La Presse (in French) are good examples. I'm sure someone can add/translate even more content, but I think this is a good start. Best, Bridget (talk) 02:24, 8 July 2025 (UTC) (edited 11:16, 8 July 2025 (UTC))[reply]
Keep. Article has seen significant improvement to both its referencing and its basic notability claims since time of nomination — as noted, the only real issue here was that her sourcing is disproportionately much more in French than English, meaning a lot of good stuff likely got overlooked. Bearcat (talk) 21:15, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: More input on the recent article expansion and its sources would be helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 21:41, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:HEY. I see several sources with significant coverage now. -- Maddy from Celeste (WAVEDASH) 23:06, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep now that the article has been expanded with improved sourcing. ScalarFactor (talk) 23:26, 10 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Significant improvements by Bridget. Bearian (talk) 15:14, 11 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Source #11 alone satisfies WP:GNG. Hugo Dumas is an extremely popular and very well-known journalist from La Presse. m a MANÍ^{1990(talk | contribs)} 22:01, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Erixon Kabera

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

Death alone does not make someone notable. It is a case of WP:BIO1E - The9Man ^Talk 10:07, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. - The9Man ^Talk 10:07, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:09, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Rwanda-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:50, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: The shooting might be notable, the individual mentioned here is very routine. Outside of the death, there is no coverage about him...Even the shooting was rather recent, I'm not sure it meets notability at this time. Rather routine event, no criminal charges laid. The investigation found no wrong-doing, so there isn't really much else to show notability. Tragic even, but not quite notable for our standards. Oaktree b (talk) 14:32, 2 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep but move to Death of Erixon Kabera. There is ongoing coverage (eg April this year [6], June this year [7]), ongoing protests (in June this year [8]) and questions being raised about policing and oversight [9], [10]. At the very least, this should be merged to List of killings by law enforcement officers in Canada, where it is not yet listed. RebeccaGreen (talk) 14:23, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:41, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete for now as Oaktree above perfectly sum up my words. Clearly not found any coverage outside the shooting. Fade258 (talk) 15:26, 9 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as suggested by RebeccaGreen, as ATD. Bearian (talk) 02:13, 11 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. [11], [12], [13]. 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 [14] and [15]. 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]

New Star Books

AfDs for this article:

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

Three years have passed since a refund following a soft delete. This article still does not meet NCORP guidelines. Dege31 (talk) 15:16, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature, Business, Companies, and Canada. Dege31 (talk) 15:16, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: GNG pass. Discussed in multiple published works, including:

The Perilous Trade: Book Publishing in Canada, 1946-2006 (2012)
Publishing Lives: Interviews with Independent Book Publishers in the Pacific Northwest and British Columbia (1996)
The Globe and Mail, "New Star Books to wind down, publisher cites BC Arts Council funding issues", 29 January 2025
Publishers Weekly, "Vancouver’s New Star Books Ceases Acquisitions", 29 January 2025
Quill and Quire, "New Star Books to close" 16 January 2025 (Quill & Quire)

More can likely be found in the depths of Newspapers.com. MediaKyle (talk) 21:16, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Notability concerns:

PW and Q&Q are trade news, for which NCORP clarifies that a higher standard is needed to establish independent coverage.

The GM article is primarily about the BC Arts Council.

Publishing Lives, as the title indicates, is a primary source with little commentary, whilst NCORP requires secondary sources.

There is something a little more substantial in the Perilous Trade, but out of the one to two pages, New Star is covered along with other publishers, and is not exclusively emphasised. Dege31 (talk) 19:22, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, PL, and TPT, are already included in the article. Dege31 (talk) 19:34, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Here's a few more just for good measure:

A New Star is rising in publishing, The Vancouver Sun
Smaller publishers land on BC Book Prizes shortlist, The Vancouver Sun
Publishers still suffer Chapters fallout, The Vancouver Sun
Benefit to help New Star Books repair after firebombing, The Georgia Straight (there is also 4 other news articles covering the arson event cited in the article)

The publisher has been around for a long time, and not only been the subject of specific coverage on numerous occasions over the years, but was also written about in-depth in at least two books, which is not trivial. All of these things put together makes this a GNG pass. Besides all that, articles about notable publishers are of encyclopedic value. MediaKyle (talk) 20:15, 6 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the two books- one is a primary source, the other one is on the edge of significant coverage. The first one is not an NCORP valid source. The second one maybe passes (I'll leave it to the discretion of others who will participate in the discussion), although it isn't exactly in-depth.

Writing about the arson is primarily something that gives notability to the event, not the publisher. A local incident, which is not NCORP significant coverage.

Source 2. Smaller publishers- brief mention of non-notable prize - not NCORP significant coverage.

Source 3. Publishers still- two statistical sentences - not NCORP significant coverage.

Source 1. A New Star is rising- this article is mostly about books published by New Star. This is points to the book's notability, and the corporation does not inherit this notability. The few paragraphs that are about New Star are either primary, or largely routine. In fact, I think this source might be an advertisement (sure looks like it, especially given its placement next to the section at the bottom) which would make it a fail of NCORP on multiple levels, but I don't at the moment have newspapers.com access.

My suggestion would be the creation of an article about Canadian small press publishing, where this subject would also be incorporated. Dege31 (talk) 20:38, 6 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!} 23:31, 5 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) 23:56, 12 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as per MediaKyle. While well-meaning, the criticisms are excessive. Bearian (talk) 18:00, 13 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]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Canada

Canada

Canada articles for deletion

Voyageurs Cup (women)

Veterans Coalition Party of Canada

Robert Marc Nelson

Adrianna Edwards

PAL Airlines Flight 2259

Umashankar Kannaiyan

Karen Vardanyan

Roboboa

Brace Yourself Games

Tʼuyʼtʼtanat-Cease Wyss

Distinctive Software

Serenity Cox

Vicky Huang

Anne-Marie Losique

Erixon Kabera

Kevin McGarry (actor)

New Star Books

Association of Visual Language Interpreters of Canada

Canada proposed deletions

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