Natalie Labbée: This subject fails all.  Sources presented and from WP:BEFORE are WP:ROUTINE coverages/ WP:RUNOFTHEMILL sources and cannot be used to establish GNG because there's no WP:SIGCOV anywhere.  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 10:20, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Women ,  and Canada .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Still not notable, sourcing is mostly to Twitter and the same local stories used last time.  Endorsing the Liberal leader isn't notable, the harassment isn't terribly notable either.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 12:14, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I have added categories to the article as it entirely had none categories and its sources were only X posts.  I tried to look for more sources online but all I could find are very few.  Thesudburystar here: https://www.thesudburystar.com/opinion/columnists/if-i-had-strong-mayor-powers-i-would-make-greater-sudburys-bureaucrats-accountable-labbe is just a piece of opinion that is just more of a campaign like and fails GNG, including this: https://www.thesudburystar.com/news/local-news/plenty-of-candidates-in-ward-7-8-and-9 .  The Villagereport here: https://www.villagereport.ca/village-picks/sudbury-councillor-has-faced-online-threats-since-she-was-elected-8817219 is just about her reacting to harassment at her home.  I failed to find sources that explain deep about the subject.  However, if someone manages to find other extra sources, I may change my vote. -- Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 12:19, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Sudbury still is not a city whose city councillors get an "inherent" notability freebie just for existing as city councillors — the bar that a Sudbury city councillor would have to clear to get a Wikipedia article is not "she exists", but "she has received such an unusually high depth and range and volume of more than purely local coverage that she could credibly claim to be one of the most uniquely significant city councillors in the entire country".  But this article isn't showing that at all.  I would also note that there's some reason to suspect conflict of interest here, given that this is the second attempt to create an article about Natalie Labbée within the past year, while there have been no attempts that I know of to create an article about any other current or recent Sudbury city councillor but her (not even the one I had under active "watchlist the redlink in case somebody tries it" surveillance for a few weeks this past winter, whom I bet at least Oaktree can guess but I won't name lest I inspire somebody to try it.) And it also now warrants mention that I submitted an SPI request on the creators of the first and second versions of this article, which has already resulted in both of them (and another username who's also been playing FAFO games on our articles about other Sudbury politicians, such as mayors and MPPs) being sockblocked.  Bearcat ( talk ) 17:11, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete previously deleted.  Fails WP:NPOL .  LibStar ( talk ) 22:58, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per nom, doesn't meet WP:BASIC C F A 💬 00:07, 1 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete city councillors are not automatically notable and there's no other real claim to notability here.  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 08:11, 2 June 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete