Deletion of Jessica Yaniv

Comment: Most everything that is in this article should just be in the article it's spun off from. Unsure a weapons charge moves this beyond  territory
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E)

Comment: I recognise  but don't think it applies here. Firstly, while the policy does not define an "event", I would not consider that a series of lawsuits in different courts (not a single lawsuit) over the period 2018-2020 comprise a single event. Secondly, while the HRT case is the most prominent aspect of Yaniv's notability, she has received press coverage for other activities, e.g. the Blaire White spat/taser arrest. Thirdly, it is questionable whether Yaniv is ; she has given multiple interviews, describes herself as working as a blogger and model, and was a contestant in the 2019 Miss BC pageant
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:LOWPROFILE)

Comment: There really is only one event here, albeit spread over a number of separate cases. A redirect to British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal covers the informational content, and, as we see, many attempts to add anything else fall foul of , because this really is not an independently notable person
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: This person has made headlines in all corners of the planet - examples: Australiahttps://au.news.yahoo.com/transgender-activist-jessica-yaniv-gynaecologist-complaint-060511635.html, UKhttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/27/male-genitalia-week-in-patriarchy-women, Russiahttps://sputniknews.com/world/201908131076539831-jessica-yaniv-a-trans-woman-with-male-genitalia-forgot-tampons-and-cant-go-to-pool/ -  is easily fulfilled. And note my above headlines are '''all for different''' stories:  the Australia article is because a physician gynacologist refused to treat the person; the Russian one was for, ummm, something about forgetting a tampon at the public pool, and the Guardian article is re: waxing.  These are headlines in three different countries, for ''three'' different reasons, easily satisfying 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NOTABILITY||WP:BLP1E)

Comment: per  and . If it becomes necessary to spin an article off British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, the subject should be the case, rather than the individual
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: We have roughly 18 citations from sources ultimately owned by about 8 different independent parent entities, that have deemed this topic notable.  The following are the parent publications.  They each own one or more publications, but (to my knowledge) don't share ownership with another parent listed here  Postmedia (National Post,Aldergrove Star), Corus(Global), Scott Trust Limited (Guardian), Government of Canada (CBC), Bell Media (CTV News), Daily News Brands (Torstar), Economist, and Key Media (Canadian Lawyer Magazine).  Given the massive consolidation in Canadian media, this is about as diverse a set sources as you can reasonably hope for on an activist with national, but not international, prominence.  Postmedia does dominate this article, in part, because they dominate what's left of Canadian print newspapers.  If you read the Postmedia articles cited, you'll find that they are not hostile to trans activism as the Post Millenial is.  They aren't making wild predictions.  The single most negative/sensational headline cited in the article is "'' "Estheticians don't have to wax male genitalia against their will, B.C. tribunal rules".''" which was by the CBC, hardly a bastion of right wing anti-trans hate.  Postmedia is a large corporation, and they haven't yet assimilated all the publications into a single unit.  The Toronto Sun and the National Post are not the same.  Nothing in Postmedia is remotely related or comparable to Post Millenial, and nothing is in the same universe as InfoWars, or other crazies you find on the net covering this.   The sources cited in this article are all reliable sources.  They are all independent.  This screams .  So, saying Postmedia is the only publication with an interest in the case is rather absurd
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)

Comment: Fails  and . This article is really about the court case, whose own article was deleted. There is no lasting significance of the court case, let alone her
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (WP:BLP1E||WP:NOTNEWSPAPER)

Comment: WP:BIO1E and  apply
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:NOTNEWS)

Comment: The prior AFD was, by it's title, was exclusively about the tribunal case, so really just an expansion of what's in  British_Columbia_Human_Rights_Tribunal#Yaniv_v._Various_Waxing_Salons.  Given the case was ongoing, and only so much to say (per ), a separate article made no sense (at the time).  The local coverage helps us discuss this person as an activist, and not just reference them as a single-note individual (it gives context to the person, we can't in the tribinual article).  I think the arrest has garnered significant coverage https://nationalpost.com/news/jessica-yaniv-a-transgender-b-c-activist-says-she-was-arrested-for-brandishing-a-taserhttps://globalnews.ca/news/6304748/jessica-yaniv-transgender-weapons-charges/https://torontosun.com/news/national/waving-stun-gun-on-livestream-lands-transgender-body-waxing-activist-behind-bars.  So, it's worthy of inclusion, but will be out of scope in British_Columbia_Human_Rights_Tribunal.  Also, I think there's clear room for growth in this article, in terms of the political/cultural dimension of it.  There is https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jul/27/male-genitalia-week-in-patriarchy-women this editorial in the Guardian about the nature/motive of most coverage of the case, why/how it's covered, combined with questions of motive of Yaniv, that can be used (it would of course, need to be attributed to the author appropriately, as opinion) that gives a much better understanding of what is actually going on, that can be explained in the Tribunal article.  There is room for growth, but I've been intentionally slow in expansion, as I am trying to exclude the 95%+ of internet "news" that's blatantly bias and unreliable on this topic.  - —&nbsp;Preceding Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned comment added by
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not (WP:CRYSTAL)