- 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. j⚛e deckertalk 01:16, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Donna Lunn (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Unable to find any coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject of this unsourced BLP, does not appear to meet GNG or ANYBIO. Would have used BLP PROD but too old. J04n(talk page) 23:24, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. J04n(talk page) 23:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. J04n(talk page) 23:25, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I found a few passing mentions on Google Books, but nothing significant enough to meet GNG. Sarahj2107 (talk) 08:53, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Makes no strong claim of notability, and cites exactly zero reliable sources. I especially got a great laugh out of the way this article highlights the fact that "she is a recipient of the Canadian Commemorative Medal" as if that meant something — for the record, that was a one-off program of community volunteer recognition which the Canadian government undertook in 1992 to mark Canada's 125th anniversary, for which anybody could send anybody's name to their local MP and then that second anybody, of which there were tens of thousands nationwide and I was one of them, would get a medallion and a "thank you for being involved in your community" form letter. Sure, it's a nice thing to have, but it doesn't mean you've earned a place in an encyclopedia — and unfortunately, nothing else here means that either. Bearcat (talk) 00:41, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- 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.