Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Linda Douma (2nd nomination)

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 keep‎. ✗plicit 00:28, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Linda Douma

AfDs for this article:

[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)

Lacks sustained WP:SIGCOV to meet any notability guideline. Falls into WP:BIO1E Let'srun (talk) 00:18, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Women, Beauty pageants, and Canada. Let'srun (talk) 00:18, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I would encourage AFD nominators to use plain English rather than cryptic "Lacks sustained WP:SIGCOV .. Falls into WP:BIO1E", etc.
I challenge both reasons. From a few-second search through Google books, I get two top hits [1] [2], which are two recent books published by UBC Press. Both have a chapter on Linda Douma, claiming that her win of Miss Canada and her activities afterwards were significant contributions to the Canadian pageant title and the feminism movement. Materialscientist (talk) 00:55, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Shoutout to Materialscientist for finding these sources. This type of sustained coverage from reliable sources proves the long-term impact she had. If this is the kind of coverage she has received just in the past three years, I can only imagine how much there is overall, especially in contemporary sources. Of course, this was all already laid out in the first nomination not even one year ago. JTtheOG (talk) 17:31, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Hate to do the standard "per x" thing response, but in this case I have to !vote like that. Thank you to Materialscientist for showing that she does indeed have good coverage. She clearly has had an impact on feminism in Canada as evidenced by the sustained coverage in multiple books. ULPS ^{(talk • contribs)} 17:37, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The sources provided above demonstrate notability based on long-term impact. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 20:21, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Thanks to the sources found by Materialscientist. MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:52, 19 August 2023 (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.