Deletion of Algoma University Students' Union

Comment: I think this is not |notable. Even if the union is mentioned in different sources (which it does not seem to be), it is still just a WP:run-of-the-mill|run-of-the-mill union. Existence does not equal notability
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)

Comment: This is borderline not |notable.  The key here I believe is sources.  The source provided is a small local newspaper with what appears to be a small staff and little editorial support.  Because the source is so weak and the type of subject is not usually included in the encyclopedia, I feel it would need multiple sources or a stronger single sources to prove notability other than in that local community.  Does it meet the letter of the policy? - yes, but not the spirit.  The article almost sabotages itself with the information on its leather chairs which makes me wonder if that is the most notable thing about the subject.  Even the 'controversy' is questionable on even being notable.  Generally if I hire someone and they don't perform to the level of my expectations, I call them names too.  At the very most, the 'controversy' section could be added to the Matthew Good article
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N)