Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claudette Roy

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 delete. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 19:18, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Claudette Roy

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Poorly sourced article about a person notable primarily as a non-winning candidate for political office. As always, this is not a role that passes WP:NPOL per se -- the notability test for politicians is holding a notable political office, not just running for one -- but there isn't much else here to hang a "preexisting notability for other reasons besides the candidacy" claim on, since it's all just unsourced career background on her work as a member of various local boards and committees. And even on a WP:BEFORE search for other coverage, I'm not finding much -- out of just 130 hits total, the clear majority are unrelated Claudette Roys such as a school board trustee in Montreal and a hockey player in Sudbury and a woman in Cornwall who won a Fitbit in a walkathon, and what little I do get for this Claudette Roy is either run of the mill campaign coverage that doesn't make her more special than other non-winning candidates or glancing namechecks of her existence as a giver of soundbite in coverage of other things, with virtually no sources that are about her in any non-trivial way. And while being named a Member (the lowest level) of the Order of Canada would be a strong notability claim if the article were sourced properly, it isn't "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have more and better sourcing than just one short blurb about a non-winning political candidacy. Bearcat (talk) 18:31, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:31, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:31, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Alberta-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:31, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Person who ran for political office and didn't win (placed third). Fails criteria at WP:NPOL. Don't see anything else about the subject that would warrant a Wikipedia article whatsoever. I'm frankly more interested in reading about the woman in Cornwall who won a Fitbit in a walkathon mentioned above, to be honest. ExRat (talk) 13:53, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Fails WP:NPOL.4meter4 (talk) 22:35, 23 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 09:44, 24 September 2021 (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.