Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vonny Sweetland


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:31, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Vonny Sweetland

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Once all the POV material and primary sources have been removed, doesn't look like there's enough here to satisfy notability. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 17:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 17:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 17:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. BubbaJoe123456 (talk) 17:54, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

@ BubbaJoe123456 I disagree. A lot of POV material did have to be removed, but the article itself was involved in what seems to be an editing war between two factions. This resulted in a lot of content (even some valid pieces that help with notability) being removed as well. I am happy to send you links that can be cited to help establish the page. The previous editors involved in the editing war should not be part of this process as they've proven an inability to be impartial when it comes to this page. Please advise of next steps. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.114.222.94 (talk) 18:06, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete The article subject has been interviewed a few times, including from several sources related to his recent political campaigns, but there does not appear to be significant coverage of him in those sources, even after sources were added by the account who uploaded the article's picture (the IP editor who commented above was blocked as a sockpuppet of that account). Two of the independent reliable sources that mention him outside of the context of his campaigns are about his time on a reality show that was cancelled before it aired, such as . Sweetland is mentioned as alleging that the producers asked him to lie about his ethnicity and pick fights over his race. The campaign-related sources provide more coverage of him than that, but they mostly consist of interviews/quotes by him, rather than independent coverage. The most extensive coverage, from the Toronto Caribbean, does not look very reliable, as discussed on the article's talk page. I think this article subject may become notable in the future, but I do not believe they pass GNG at this point, and they do not qualify for WP:NPOL yet. – wallyfromdilbert (talk) 19:26, 15 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - It doesn't seem like this will fit the criteria for notability, as per BubbaJoe123456. When sources are cleared, there isn't much in the article. It's possible that this can become an article again if they become a high-profile candidate or are elected; but, at this time, this isn't a situation where anyone running for any seat under any party line should have a Wiki article. GoLeafsGo 00:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. The subject doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:BIO/WP:POLITICIAN. Now that all of the unencyclopedic claims and blatantly unreliable sources have been removed, I'm simply not seeing significant coverage in reliable, third-party published sources. There are trivial mentions in The Star and National Post, moderate coverage about events related to the subject at Toronto.com and Politics Today, and more substantial coverage of the subject at Toronto Caribbean. But that Toronto Caribbean source is local puff piece journalism, nothing that I would consider reliable. (Even if it were reliable, it's still a single instance of significant coverage.) I checked Google and can't find anything better. Woodroar (talk) 17:26, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete He has a blog and tried running for office but didn't make it. Oaktree b (talk) 18:30, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. People do not get Wikipedia articles just for being unsuccessful candidates in political party nomination contests, but nothing else here (not even in the pre-editwar versions) constitutes strong evidence of preexisting notability for other reasons inddependently of an unsuccessful candidacy. Bearcat (talk) 15:33, 20 June 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.