Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maggie Shaddick

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 23:40, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Maggie Shaddick

[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)

Biography of a person whose notability claims are not properly referenced to reliable sources. The claims here are that she was assistant provincial commissioner of an organization and that she won that organization's own internal "staff" award, neither of which are "inherently" notable enough to exempt a person from having to pass WP:GNG on the sourcing -- but the three footnotes here comprise her paid-inclusion death notice in the newspaper classifieds and two pieces of content self-published by the organization she was directly affiliated with, none of which are notability-building sources as they don't represent independent journalistic or analytical coverage about her.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to be referenced considerably better than this. Bearcat (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Quebec. Bearcat (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Scouting. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:52, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I dropped the problematic sourcing and and three newspaper sources to document many of the pertinent facts. --evrik ^(talk) 02:52, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:46, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep it looks like the recent changes now pass WP:GNG.--Paul McDonald (talk) 15:13, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I have added newspaper sourcing from the 1940s - 1990s. (There are articles in other papers, but the ones chosen gave more in-depth coverage). She was involved in scouting in both England and Canada, was a district commissioner and first woman commissioner appointed in Canada, and then later was an assistant provincial commissioner. Clearly a cut above the average scouting leader. (I do not know if she was successful in getting the film on Baden Powell made, but if someone is interested in searching for it, there is more information in the 1983 clipping.) Sufficient information, over time, in RS, which are independent of the subject to support GNG and write a reasonably complete biography of the subject. SusunW (talk) 23:12, 12 May 2022 (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.