Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Green Party Shadow Cabinet of the 41st Parliament of Canada

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. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:44, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Green Party Shadow Cabinet of the 41st Parliament of Canada

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

Delete. Unsourced list of mostly non-notable people, which misrepresents its topic as something it isn't. While the Green Party of Canada has various party members who are designated as media spokespeople for the party's positions on various issues, that's not the same thing as a shadow cabinet — the shadow cabinet consists of elected MPs who serve as actual critics on the issues in the House of Commons (e.g. by actually posing actual questions to the official cabinet during Question Period.) But the Greens only had two MPs in the 41st Parliament, which meant they had an extraparliamentary system of party spokespeople but only two true members of the real shadow cabinet — and since the media doesn't actually devote significant coverage to the party's opinions on any issue besides the environment, virtually nobody else listed here has any real public visibility (and even the two non-MPs who do have Wikipedia articles have them for other reasons not connected to their roles as Green Party spokespeople per se; one has notability as a writer, while the other quit the party and then won election as a territorial MLA with a different party.) So it's simply not a list we need to maintain in the absence of reliable source coverage to support it. Bearcat (talk) 15:28, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 15:28, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete the list is misnamed, it is not a shoadow cabinet, and there is no show of reliable source caring about these people.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:40, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree with the reasons stated above.Grammarphile (talk) 19:21, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:28, 26 December 2016 (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.