Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Charles Léonard Yvon Beaulne


 * 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. After two weeks the only argument in favour of deletion is from the nominator, with other contributors agreeing that the subject is notable. Michig (talk) 06:42, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Joseph Charles Léonard Yvon Beaulne

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BIO of a deceased diplomat, relying entirely on a single source and making no particularly substantive claim of notability as a diplomat. As always, ambassadors are not entitled to claim a notability freebie just because they existed — to earn an article on Wikipedia, they need to be the subject of enough reliable source coverage to satisfy WP:GNG. Delete. (Note that if anybody does want to take a crack at sourcing this up to a keepable standard, what you actually need to search for is "Yvon Beaulne" rather than "Joseph Charles Léonard Yvon Beaulne".) Bearcat (talk) 04:03, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - Canadian ambassador to the UN; passes WP:ANYBIO as he received Order of Canada  —Мандичка YO 😜 09:59, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * And Order of Malta —Мандичка YO 😜 10:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment - - just want to remind you to please follow WP:BEFORE nominating an article for deletion. Your comment that the article relied on a single source and made "no particularly substantive claim of notability", along with the comment that "if anybody does want to take a crack at sourcing this up to a keepable standard, what you actually need to search for is "Yvon Beaulne"" implies you yourself did not take a crack at sourcing it or do a basic search. I find this annoys me. Just because you feel diplomats are not notable doesn't mean they are actually not notable. The French version of this article clearly states he was awarded the Order of Canada, an indication he contributed something along the way, and a basic search shows this to be the case. Please follow WP:BEFORE in the future. Merci.,    —Мандичка YO 😜 10:53, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I do not have comprehensive access to all of the possible sources that might contribute to getting a diplomat over WP:GNG, but can only work with the resources that I have access to. Just as an example, I have access to no newspaper coverage databases that would contribute anything toward GNGing a diplomat whose career took place in the 1960s and 1970s — the one I have that includes coverage of that time period includes almost no Canadian newspapers, and the one I have that incorporates Canadian newspapers includes only spotty and extremely incomplete coverage anytime prior to 1981. So nothing I said constitutes any sort of evidence that I failed to do any WP:BEFORE — he doesn't turn up much of anything in the resources available to me, but that doesn't mean there's no possibility of other sources existing which I don't have access to but other Wikipedians do. So kindly spare me the lectures about how I need to do something I already did.
 * And this has nothing to do with what I personally feel about the notability of diplomats, either — AFD has an established consensus that diplomats are not automatically notable just because they exist, or automatically entitled to keep unsourced or primary sourced stubs which make no substantive claim of notability beyond their existence. They're absolutely considered to be notable if they can be properly sourced as passing WP:GNG or a more specific notability criterion, but do not get an automatic "all diplomats are automatically notable" pass. Bearcat (talk) 17:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:39, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:41, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:41, 13 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep The Order of Canada gets him over the GNG bar. J bh  Talk  19:40, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Claims of notability don't satisfy GNG, no matter how impressive they are, if they're unsourced — passing or failing GNG is a question of the quality of sourcing that is or isn't available about the person, not of any unsourced claim that an article can ever simply assert without supporting it with reliable sources. Bearcat (talk) 21:39, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * His entry from The Governor General of Canada's website. [//www.gg.ca/honour.aspx?id=2996&t=12&ln=Beaulne Order of Canada Yvon Beaulne, C.M.] J bh  Talk  22:01, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Reliable sourcing = media coverage, not profile blurbs on the websites of directly affiliated organizations. Bearcat (talk) 22:02, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Ummm... No. The official site of the office which makes the award is RS. In this case the Governor General General of Canada, acting on behalf of Queen Elizabeth II is who makes the appointment. The site I linked is the site the newspapers would use to verify it. In this case being a member of The Order of Canada is, as I understand it, notable in and of itself. We do not need sources commenting on the award. The fact of the award is all that needs verification and the Governor General's web site, to be specific the section of the site designed to look up those who have received awards is where that fact is confirmed. If you disagree I invite you to bring it up as WP:RSN where I will abide by the consensus there. J bh  Talk  00:15, 23 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Below are a couple of refs I found and clipped on newspapers.com. I will post them on the talk page of the article as well.

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:09, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep as meeting WP:GNG. VMS Mosaic (talk) 11:55, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Claims of notability don't satisfy GNG, no matter how impressive they are, if they're unsourced — passing or failing GNG is a question of the quality of sourcing that is or isn't available about the person, not of any unsourced claim that an article can ever simply assert without supporting it with reliable sources. Bearcat (talk) 21:39, 22 June 2015 (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.