Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hélène Laverdure


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:19, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Hélène Laverdure

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of an archivist and curator, not reliably sourced as clearing our notability standards. As always, people are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they have jobs -- the notability test is the extent to which their work did or did not result in them receiving coverage about it in media. But that's not what any of the sources here are: one is a Q&A interview in a specialty trade magazine in which she's talking about herself in the first person, which is not enough to make her notable all by itself if it's the best you can do; one is an article on the self-published blog of a directly affiliated organization, which is not an independent or reliable media source; one is a press release on the self-published website of her own employer, which is not an independent source (and merely mentions her name in the caption to a photograph without being about her in any non-trivial sense, to boot); and one is a press release from us, which mentions her name in the context of having given a speech at a Wikimania convention but isn't about her either, and isn't support for notability anyway as it represents a WP:CIRCULAR citation to ourselves. As always, it's not the things the article says that make a person notable enough for an article -- it's the quality and depth and independence of the sources that can be shown to support the things it says, but none of these are valid or notability-supporting sources. Bearcat (talk) 18:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:13, 2 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete We really do want to avoid being self-referential.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:49, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 11:20, 5 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete There are certainly independent, reliable sources that verify that she is the Director General of the BAnQ (eg, , , ) - note that I am not saying that they constitute SIGCOV, though. I have been trying to work out whether other archivists, about whom there are articles, are notable based on specific guidelines, or by virtue of being the head of national archives. Some certainly meet WP:ANYBIO (like Pierre-Georges Roy) or WP:NACADEMIC (like Sarah Tyacke). I can't see any achievements of Jeff James (public servant) that would meet notability guidelines besides being Chief Executive and Keeper of The National Archives (United Kingdom). Does that position count for WP:NACADEMIC: "The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society."? If it does, then all directors of national archives would be notable - but would that also apply to directors of state archives? as, despite being called the Bibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec, it is actually the archives of the province of Quebec. I think I would tend to say that the position of head of state or province-level archives does not give presumed notability (per WP:NACADEMIC or anything else) - perhaps being head of a nation's national archives does, though that's not being decided here. So, in this case, I would say that she doesn't yet meet any notability guidelines. She may well do so in the future, if she becomes a fellow of a learned society, receives a high-level national award, etc - but for now, it seems WP:TOOSOON. RebeccaGreen (talk) 13:12, 9 December 2019 (UTC)


 * 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.