Deletion of List of vehicles sold in Canada but not the United States

Comment: Unless this complete list has previously been published by a reliable source, then this article is in violation of  and . No indication that such a list has been previously compiled
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:No original research (WP:OR||WP:SYNTH)

Comment: The nominator's citation of  was most appropriate.  Under point 6, Case studies, it reads ''Many topics are based on the relationship of factor X to factor Y, resulting in one or more full articles.''...''This is perfectly acceptable when the two variables put together represent some culturally significant phenomenon or some otherwise notable interest. Often, separate articles are needed for a subject within a range of different countries due to its substantial differences across international borders. Articles like Slate industry in Wales and Island Fox are fitting examples. Writing about Oak trees in North Carolina or a Blue truck, however, would likely constitute a POV fork, original research, or would otherwise be outright ridiculous.''  This article is clearly more closer to the "ridiculous" and  than something that represents ''some culturally significant phenomenon or some otherwise notable interest''.  If it would, then reliable sources would back up why the relationship between cars sold in American and Canadian would belong in an encyclopedia. Failing  is a good indicator that this article is OT|not suitable for an encyclopedia
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTMANUAL||WP:OR||WP:N||WP:NOT)

Comment: per . The list's topic is too narrow and is trivial; therefore it doesn't contribute to human knowledge and isn't an appropriate topic
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists (WP:SALAT)