Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joy Henderson


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 15:06, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Joy Henderson

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I do not believe this article/person passes WP:GNG. I found a couple self-published op-eds from her and she's been interviewed a couple times but I do not see numerous in-depth articles written about her. The references used in this article are quick "middle of the moment" articles that do not show notability. The fact that she was interviewed about racist costumes does not show notability. The fact that she left the NDP (I don't think she was ever elected to a notable position) does not show notability. The references I can find online seem to show that she's been interviewed for sound bites/opinions but I don't think that makes someone notable enough for Wikipedia. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 15:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Women. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 15:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Discrimination and Canada.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:27, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  19:27, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete: Not seeing notability. The first Toronto Star article is basically her talking to the newspaper about why certain Halloween costumes are/were offensive to groups (before they were removed from stores). She now writes for the newspaper . She seems to be the "talking head" media in Toronto go to when they want to do an article about the issue, which is fine, but none of the articles are about this individual, only asking her opinion on xyz thing. "Advocate" is another way of saying marketing person, which seems to be what this is, she's the "expert" on sensitive issues involving certain communities (nothing of which is bad, it's just not the type of notability needed to have an article in wikipedia). Oaktree b (talk) 19:59, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Delete, without prejudice against recreation in the future if and when somebody can do better. Notability is not established by sources in which she's the writer or speaker giving soundbite commentary about other things, it's established by sources in which she's the subject of coverage and analysis written by other people — but the sources here are the former, not the latter, which means they aren't helping to get her over WP:GNG at all. Bearcat (talk) 13:41, 26 October 2023 (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.