Deletion of Canadian Who's Who

Comment: per  ({{tq|"The book has been the subject of two or more non-trivial published works..."}})https://books.google.ch/books?id=_ETq_s7Cy9UC&pg=PA203&lpg=PA203&dq=#v=onepage&q&f=falsehttps://books.google.ch/books?id=b_vn-nNUghkC&pg=PA230&dq=#v=onepage&q&f=false
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NBOOK)

Comment: per  - it's obviously not a textbook but {{Tq|serve a very different function and come to be published through very different processes than do books intended for the general public}} seems to apply.  There's a lot of mentions of the book (like https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/meet-the-acclaimed-canadian-author-who-couldnt-stop-lying-about-his-birthplace/) that wouldn't meet NBOOK#1, but I think are sufficient here.  We have an article on Yellow Pages Group, and this seems similar
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:TEXTBOOKS)

Comment: I came to this article expecting a Keep but there are almost no significant RS on this publication (or site) to support .  This article has existed for over a decade, and not a single material independent RS has been added.  References quoted above like this https://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/meet-the-acclaimed-canadian-author-who-couldnt-stop-lying-about-his-birthplace/ MacLean's, and this https://www.pressreader.com/canada/the-peterborough-examiner/20090808/281590941577114 Perterborough Examiner are not enough as they are not about Who's Who, but just refer to it (we are not questioning existance, but notability). This Canadian journalist's http://www.robertfulford.com/CWW.html blog is the only actual article on Canadian Who's Who but it is not acceptable for WP as an RS; it does explain why the publication was doomed, as you pay your subscription and write your own bio (the reason why it ended up in the MacLean's article above).  Media-type GNG cases should be straightforward to prove, as by definition being in the media sector, they should throw up lots of RS.  Hardly a single major Canadian newspaper or Canadian television network seems to be interested in the ''Canadian Who's Who''? This has almost nothing in terms of a GNG RS, and certainly when the requirement for "several" significant indepenent RS is added, it is a clear fail
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: per nomination. Nothing of substance is out there to support its notability. All we have supporting inclusion are variations of 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:ILIKEIT)