Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of women elected to Canadian Parliament


 * 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. No support for deletion. Options to rename, change, or otherwise further develop are all matters to be addressed through ordinary editing and discussion. postdlf (talk) 15:32, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

List of women elected to Canadian Parliament

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Unnecessary and incomplete list. The core problem with this is that already contains standalone lists of women in each individual session of Parliament, so it's not clear that the existing lists actually need to be paired with a comprehensive one-stop list of all the same women who are already in the other lists. In addition, it bears note that even though this list was first created in 2019, it's failed to add any woman who was elected to parliament since 2011: none of the freshwomen from 2015 or 2019, no woman who won any by-election since 2011. No Marci Ien, no Ya'ara Saks, no Jody Wilson-Raybould, no Jane Philpott, no Chrystia Freeland. And even worse, it isn't even fully complete for 2011, with no Elizabeth May or Michelle Rempel Garner or Nycole Turmel, either: even for 2011, it's missing every single woman whose name comes after Anne-Marie Day in alphabetical order. But since the more specific lists already exist, it's not clear that there would be any point in investing the time to actually fix this one. Bearcat (talk) 18:55, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:55, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 18:55, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:15, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:15, 30 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep/Merge the other lists into this one. Women in the 43rd Canadian Parliament being missing from the overall list is not a reason to delete the overall list, rather a reason to merge the 43rd into this. Women in the 15th Canadian Parliament is stupid. Each of the individual lists duplicates the main list. I would compare to Women in the United States House of Representatives: Having a single consolidated list of women who served in one or multiple congresses/parliaments? Great idea! Having lots of individual pages that duplicate and split out the information? Poor idea! Reywas92Talk 21:43, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I see the main list only has 63 view in the last month, explained by the fact not a single article links to it, so no wonder it's out of date! I added it to Template:Women in Canadian politics, and perhaps some Canadian politics editors will be interested in filling it out! Reywas92Talk 21:52, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
 * No, we don't necessarily want the other lists merged out of existence, and that's absolutely not happening absent a full batched merger discussion that sees every one of those pages directly tagged so that all interested parties are properly informed of the discussion and able to participate in it — even if merging them all into one list is warranted, which is not inherently obvious, piloting it under the radar via an AFD discussion on a little-viewed duplicate is not the way to get that done. So those pages are not going anywhere absent a proper merge discussion through the proper merge discussion channels. Bearcat (talk) 18:12, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Rename List of pioneering women members of the Parliament of Canada and trim accordingly? Being a female MP is not that big a deal anymore. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:51, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Firstly, what purpose does this list actually serve so long as the other, narrower lists already exist? Secondly, where would you propose to apply a "pioneering" cutoff, so that women before that cutoff got listed while women after the cutoff didn't, without violating our rules against arbitrary cutoffs? And thirdly, while a woman being elected as an MP isn't as unusual anymore as it used to be, women are 50 per cent the population, but still only about 25 per cent of current elected officials and maybe 10 per cent of the historical totals at best. And precisely because women in politics are still a relatively recent phenomenon, they are actually the subject of academic study about the intersection of gender with the job of politics. So no, until such time as 50 per cent of all MPs have been women, so that the proportion of women MPs actually matches the proportion of women constituents, it still matters. Bearcat (talk) 18:12, 31 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Women in Canadian politics for now, then create a WP:List of lists for each list of "Women in the xxth Canadian Parliament". At 233 000kb, it is already exceeding the WP:SIZERULE guideline and adding the information from the 2011, 2015 and 2019 elections will make it worse. Redirecting the page to Women in Canadian politics allows readers to access this information as linked at the top of "Women as federal representatives." After the redirect, I think we should create a list of lists for women in each Parliamentary session ( as I think this topic fulfils the first bullet point in List of lists's purpose. Z1720 (talk) 18:40, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * False. SIZERULE applies to readable prose length, not to total page size, which here is almost entirely table and text formatting. I just removed 27,000b just by removing the superfluous "rowspan=1" on every row, and a further 76,000 by removing very long dead URLs! We need articles for individual parliaments no more than we need List of women in the 116th United States Congress: the information is already in the main overall list. Reywas92Talk 19:33, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I went back to the article and saw the amazing work did to remove deadlinks and unnecessary formatting. I know SIZERULE applies to prose length, but a list like this is going to use lots of formatting and I believe it will be very long when the MPs from 2011-2019 are added.


 * It's mentioned above that . This caused me to look at other articles and talk page discussions on this topic around Wikipedia. For the US Congress, there is no List of Women in the United States Congress and List of Women in the United States House of Representatives redirects to "Women in the United States House of Representatives" (I could not find a Senate equivalent). There was a discussion in US House of Reps talk page which ended with the list remaining in the article but divided into time periods. There is also a List of female Members of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom and there has not been a discussion there to fork the list. Yes, I know WP:OTHERSTUFF is not an acceptable AfD argument, but I think it is important to find out if there is consensus on this topic elsewhere (and it doesn't seem that way).


 * What I keep thinking about is this quote from WP:ARTICLESIZE: . I think the UK list is too long and difficult to read, and I fear that the Canadian list will be similarily long, which is why I support creating the list of lists. I totally understand others who disagree with me because it's not supported by the ARTICLESIZE kb limitations, but I think lists end up being physically bigger than article prose and should WP:SPINOUT at lower kb lengths. Z1720 (talk) 21:36, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I have added the new members from the 42nd and 43rd Parliaments to the list. It's not completely done or perfect, but this should be the full length, and I also split it into a few sectioned tables like the US list – it's now at 150kb, some stuff still to be added, but some formatting can still be removed. It still shorter than the UK House of Commons list, since that body is also literally twice as large as the Canadian House of Commons. The other issue is Women in the 40th Canadian Parliament, is just a subset of List of House members of the 40th Parliament of Canada, etc.: there's no benfit to duplicating them out for each session. The US Senate equivalent is Women in the United States Senate (a smaller body of course). What I often find unreadable is a list being chopped into ~30 separate articles, which are duplicative and provide no information about when they first took or finally left office. A consolidated list is about the women who served as a whole historically than the membership of a particular session. Reywas92Talk 23:22, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:37, 4 November 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment, does wikipedia need an overarching article on this with various sections that include hatnotes to specific list articles that provide more details? i reckon yes. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:49, 4 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep: Article meets WP:CLN specificially "Consider that lists may include features not available to categories, and building a rudimentary list of links is a useful step in improving a list. Deleting these rudimentary lists is a waste of these building blocks, and unnecessarily pressures list builders into providing a larger initial commitment of effort whenever they wish to create a new list, which may be felt as a disincentive." and Advantages of a list. This list will be a general list of the individuals and it will have a WP:LISTOFLISTS for each paraliment.  // Timothy ::  talk  13:46, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   08:43, 7 November 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz Humbug! 09:42, 15 November 2020 (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.