Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Statue of Elizabeth II (Winnipeg)


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Eternal Shadow   Talk  20:03, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Statue of Elizabeth II (Winnipeg)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No claim made for notability. One of several hundred QE2 statues, no significance. -  Floydian  τ ¢ 16:17, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  Floydian  τ ¢ 16:17, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

*Delete Non notable, lacks significant coverage in sources aside from the toppling of the statue being mentioned. Eternal Shadow  Talk  16:48, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Apart from the latest incident, there are earlier sources such as this and that. There are obvious alternatives to deletion such as merger with Government House (Manitoba) and so there's no case for deletion. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:05, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * There's no content to be merged. The single sentence fits in quite well in the Iconoclasm section of Canadian Indian residential schools gravesite discoveries. I'm fine with a redirect, but I knew it would be undone if I was bold. -  Floydian  τ ¢ 17:21, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Did you try searching for sources? Or was this a drive-by nomination? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:09, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Did you when you created the single sentence article with no mention of why it is notable? Or was this a drive-by stub creation? -  Floydian  τ ¢ 17:18, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , You're the one jumping to AfD here, rather than sharing your concerns on the article's talk page or taking a different lesser action. Also, you're answering a question by asking a question (or two). Did you actually try to find any sources before nominating for deletion? --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:24, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Nothing that didn't echo the toppling article, aside from the government description. Seemed like WP:Recentism for the most part, with maybe 2 sentences describing the statue itself. As a featured content editor I'd figure you'd be more behoove to creating something of sustenance. -  Floydian  τ ¢ 18:04, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , lol ok well whatever, stubs are just fine sometimes. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:20, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Merge The content of this article suggests the statue of QE2 in Winnipeg is at least worthy of mention on this encyclopedia, but within the confines of another article, such as Canadian Indian residential schools gravesite discoveries or Government House (Manitoba). The statue itself appears most notable in association with both topics and appears to have very little if any significance outside of what would be sufficiently described in passing within those articles. Also,, it is not entirely inappropriate to immediately establish a AfD with an stub of such brevity that lacks any detail not featured elsewhere. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:28, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , ... not when the nominating editor doesn't even make a case for deletion. Simply saying "No claim made for notability" and "One of several hundred QE2 statues, no significance" reads like an opinion and not an evaluation of sourcing, IMO. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 17:30, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , that's a fair criticism, but the sourcing seems to suggest that the statue does indeed lack notability and is simply one of the many QE2 statues out there. All that said, I would encourage you to at least preserve the material you have assembled already onto a sandbox page in the event of deletion, as it is possible you might be able to produce a substantive article if more pre-protest sources appear. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:36, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. There is probably abundant coverage of the statue's initial creation and installation in 1970 and subsequent reinstallation in print-only sources. The statue is included in the Manitoba Historical Society's list of Historic Sites of Manitoba. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 18:14, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep per GNG. I've worked to flesh out the article a bit. The Description section needs more detail, but between coverage of the original installation, the rededication in 2010, and the recent toppling, I'm satisfied this subject meets eligibility criteria. The article should be expanded, not deleted. Next time try searching for sources before nominating, and giving an actual reason for deletion... --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:21, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep With the significant expansion underway, it looks like there is a decent case to be made for retention on the basis of the statue's historic and artistic qualities. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:31, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , Do you plan to strike out your above vote? Just trying to avoid confusion here. Thanks! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:35, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * So, uh, I don't really know how to do that...I've never changed my mind before in my life. Consider this permission for you to do so for me. Good work, by the way. ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:37, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , Thanks again. I'm not comfortable striking out someone else's comments, especially since the deletion nomination is for an article started by me. But striking text is simple: just add before and after the text. For example, Merge yields Merge . Happy editing! --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:41, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:33, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Manitoba-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:33, 14 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Withdraw nomination - While I still feel this is three sentences and a heaping spoonful of WP:Recentism, it meets the notability criteria at this point. -  Floydian  τ ¢ 18:56, 14 July 2021 (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.