:Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natasha Doyle-Merrick

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Natasha Doyle-Merrick}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Natasha Doyle-Merrick}})

WP:BLP of an artist and unelected political candidate, not properly sourced as passing either WP:NARTIST or WP:NPOL.
Artists are not automatically notable enough for Wikipedia articles just because their work exists, and have to be shown to pass WP:GNG on third-party reliable source coverage and analysis about their work -- but the art stuff here is referenced to sources that are not support for notability, such as calendar listings on the self-published primary source websites of galleries where her work has been shown and/or blogs, rather than detailed or substantive coverage about her art.
And unelected candidates do not get articles just for being candidates -- the notability test for politicians is holding a notable political office, not just running for one, while unelected candidates normally get articles only if they already had preexisting notability for other reasons that would already have gotten them an article anyway (which, again, has not been established here). The existence of a small amount of campaign coverage, further, does not give an unelected candidate a GNG pass that would exempt them from NPOL in and of itself -- every candidate in every election everywhere can always show some evidence of campaign coverage, so if campaign coverage were enough to sideline NPOL all by itself then NPOL would be rendered meaningless and unenforceable, since no candidate in any election would ever fail to get exempted from it. And even some of the sourcing for the political stuff is still primary sourcing (e.g. press releases from organizations, raw vote results tables) that wouldn't be support for notability regardless.
So having the merely expected level of coverage in the context of an election campaign that she withdrew from and thus didn't win does not translate into permanent notability in and of itself, if she has no GNG-worthy coverage in any other context besides that. Bearcat (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2025 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists, Politicians, and Canada. Bearcat (talk) 16:42, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:38, 13 April 2025 (UTC)
• Delete{{snd}}Per nom. Yue🌙 02:15, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
• :It needs to changed not deleted.
• :In 2019, Doyle‑Merrick resigned from the AGO Bistro after a staff member told her her natural hair “could scare customers.” This was extensively covered by The Toronto Star, discussed in ELLE Canada, and analyzed in the McGill Journal of Law and Health—far more than a “microaggression,” it prompted institutional discussions about hair discrimination.
• :Biographical detail:
• :Mentioning her father, Toronto rapper HDV, is purely contextual (much like other Wikipedia biographies). She even penned a Toronto Star op‑ed on how his influence shaped her community work.
• :Artistic practice:
• :She’s had an two exhibitions—one at Brick Lane Gallery in London, UK, another at Cedar Ridge Gallery in Toronto—covered by BlogTO. In January 2025 she received an Ontario Arts Council Exhibition Assistance Grant (recommended by the Nia Centre for the Arts), demonstrating peer‑reviewed support for her work.
• :Electoral withdrawal and advocacy:
• :Her decision to step aside in the 2025 Eglinton–Lawrence race was widely reported by the Canadian Press (syndicated in Coast Reporter), NOW Toronto, The Caribbean Camera, National Post, The Globe and Mail, and The Toronto Star, and even came up during the Ontario leaders’ debate. That act of strategic voting itself became a form of public advocacy—and it set a precedent: shortly afterward, a Liberal candidate in Windsor and a Green Party candidate also withdrew to avoid vote‑splitting, demonstrating a growing willingness among contenders to prioritize collective outcomes over individual campaigns.
• :Conclusion:
• :Between her coverage in independent, reliable outlets, receipt of a peer‑reviewed Ontario Arts Council grant, and sustained activism on issues like race‑based hair discrimination and strategic voting, Natasha Doyle‑Merrick clearly satisfies WP:GNG, WP:NACTIVIST, and WP:NARTIST. I therefore recommend reframing her article around her work as an activist and visual artist—tightening citations and removing any promotional language—rather than deleting it Oceanmoonsun (talk) 03:59, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
• Delete. I agree with the nomination (and appreciate the detail). I am going to also note Wikipedia:NOTINHERITED as there is a citation that mentions her father is Jacky Jasper. I also did a Google News search and only found two non-election articles. The first is a [https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/a-black-ago-worker-was-told-her-hair-could-scare-customers-the-gallery-agreed-that/article_00acb403-e05c-59a6-a003-4ec2520088d8.html Toronto Star] article recounting a microaggression. The second is an Elle Canada piece that mentions her by name in a passing reference to that incident. I do not believe the Toronto Star article allows Natasha Doyl Merrick to meet GNG. Via the Wikipedia Library, I found nothing in the Newspapers Archive or EBSCO Host. A Google search of "Natasha Doyle" site:www.theglobeandmail.com only reveals an article abou the 2025 withdraw.--Mpen320 (talk) 14:54, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
• :Fact: Subject is a public figure. Fact: Subject represents what a Black-Canadian Woman in Ontario (and Canadian) politics looks like. Fact: Subject is a living person who has clearly contributed a consistency of works deemed relevant by credible media outlets.
• :Note: We, as Wikipedia contributors, are not here to judge, we are here to document fact. these are the facts. We are here to ensure that all fact -- whether or not we may or may not individually "like" a thing and/or be in support of a thing --- the fact remains that a thing is a thing and that thing happened. We are not here to Censor information. We are not here to DELETE fact. In fact, censorship and the deletion of fact goes against everything that the Democracy of the Wikipedia Movement stands for.
• :I call for those three of you commenters who are here -- not to add to this Wikipedia Movement , but rather you are proving to takeaway from this non-governmental encyclopedic movement By We The People, For We The People -- for you @Bearcat and Co. are proven to clearly be invested in the censorship of relevant, valuable information from this Wikipedia Mission, by your unjust nomination to clear the record of a Black Canadian woman political figure and a public inspiration of promise for a young black girls across Canada *** Please see TVO report, [https://www.tvo.org/article/thats-how-you-do-it-black-women-in-ontario-politics-past-present-and-future Black women in Ontario politics — past, present, and future] , a 2022 article addressing the role that Black woman candidates serves to inspire Black female youth to consider entering politics after seeing Black woman as politcal candidates that look like them. "According to Velma Morgan, chair of [https://obvc.ca/ Operation Black Vote Canada] —an organization that supports the election of Black people to public office — while Black women run at rates roughly equal to those of Black men, they still run in lower numbers compared to other demographics. ... "politics was often portrayed as a corrupt old-boys’ club, and as a Black woman, the idea of running seemed almost unimaginable to her ... "Supporting Black candidates doesn’t simply affect government — a range of diverse candidates will likely increase the participation of diverse voters, says Tolley: “There is a definitive link between the presence of a more diverse range of people in public life and the desire and willingness of a broader range of voters to get involved and participate.” Tolley says there is evidence that, when members of historically underrepresented groups begin to run for office and get elected in larger numbers, that encourages voter participation. And there’s also a spin-off role-model effect, she adds, pointing to the fact that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama increased the desire of young women and Black people to participate in politics."... "The impact extends to those who aren’t even old enough to vote. Kitchener Centre NDP MPP Laura Mae Lindo says, “I've had Black young women that have run up to me when they've seen me in the hallways and say that they couldn’t even believe their eyes when they saw somebody with [dreadlocks] standing in the chamber.”...
• :This debate was prompted after User @Bearcat nominated the page Natasha Doyle-Merrick for deletion, stating that the Subject should not "have a page" ((?????). The user @Bearcat then made another notion that "anyone can run as a candidate in a political election" and noted that just because a person is a candidate does not secure them "a page" ... Not only is this nomination for deletion unjust and clearly based on subjective opinion, "Erin Tolley, an associate professor of political science at Carleton University, notes that "politics can be a hostile environment, particularly for racialized women. “Historically, there haven't been a lot of highly visible role models,” she says. “And when those role models come forward, in some cases, rather than being role models of what one is able to accomplish in politics, they instead become role models for how hostile the space is.” .https://www.tvo.org/article/thats-how-you-do-it-black-women-in-ontario-politics-past-present-and-future
• :*** Consider the recent deletion of Jackie Robinson record of military service: https://www.espn.com/mlb/story/_/id/44316899/defense-department-removes-story-robinson-military-serviceHumanWritesBook (talk) 21:36, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
• :Fact: Subject is a public figure. Fact: Subject represents what a Black-Canadian Woman in Ontario (and Canadian) politics looks like. Fact: Subject is a living person who has clearly contributed a consistency of works deemed relevant by credible media outlets. HumanWritesBook (talk) 21:36, 16 April 2025 (UTC), entered for We the People, by We the People, in support of a Racially Diverse face of Politics in Canada, inclusive of Black Women on the Political campaign trail and in political office ... @Bearcat "Just because you didn't vote for a candidate, that doest mean that they didn't run. (I smell censorship )...in play ... Fact is Fact. Truth is Truth.Let the record of fact reflected in the page Natasha Doyle-Merrick , remain, for it is just and good. https://www.usatoday.com/story/life/books/2018/10/08/four-women-share-their-stories-new-book-colored-girls-who-have-considered-politics/1521940002/ HumanWritesBook (talk) 21:36, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Fact: every single candidate in every single election everywhere can always claim to be a "public figure" by virtue of having run as a candidate in an election — so just asserting that the subject is a "public figure" does not automatically get them into Wikipedia in and of itself. People get into Wikipedia by passing WP:GNG on third-party coverage about them, in reliable sources independent of themselves, which establishes the long term significance of their public activity: a politician gets an article by holding an WP:NPOL-passing office, not by running for one and then withdrawing mid-campaign, and an artist gets an article by having professional art critics externally analyze the significance of her work, not just by using the self-published websites of art galleries to prove that her work exists. Our inclusion standards do not work differently based on race or gender — she hasn't been "targeted" because she's a black woman, the article has been listed for discussion because it isn't saying anything about her would pass our notability criteria. (Note as well that I've personally been the creator of numerous articles about both men and women of colour within the past couple of weeks alone, so I can hardly be accused of any sort of racism here.) Bearcat (talk) 21:54, 16 April 2025 (UTC)

::

::{{shortcut|WP:AFDSOCK}}

::Peace and Good will to all Wikipedians... in the matter of the unjust and clearly evident politically-motivated bias move to nominated the page Natasha Doyle-Merrick for deletion ... a page of the Fact: Subject is a public figure. a page of the Fact: Subject represents what a Black-Canadian Woman in Ontario (and Canadian) politics as a two-time candidate and a public politcal artist recogninzed in mainstream media reports. .. a page of the Fact: Subject is a living person who has clearly contributed a consistency of works deemed relevant by credible media outlets.

::In the journalistic cause of the true democracy of this Wikipedia movement i call to respectfully request for neutral users -- including, but not limited it, @Richard75, @Maxim, , @Sunshineisles2, @Johnsoniensis, @Werkwer@Tuckerresearch, @Senomo Drines @BaduFerreira, @Sosorrysalty! -- to kindly join this discussion -- one which I clearly suspect to be rooted in political-biased , censorship, and possible notes of apparent sockpuppetry . Sockpuppetry is not tolerated. All page information is fact, beyond the shadow of any doubt whatsoever. HumanWritesBook (talk) 01:46, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

:::Fact: the subject Natasha Doyle-Merrick is a subject noted on at least eight (8) other Wikipedia articles:

:::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eglinton%E2%80%94Lawrence_(provincial_electoral_district)

:::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidates_of_the_2025_Ontario_general_election

:::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Canadian_politicians_who_have_switched_parties

:::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Candidates_of_the_2022_Ontario_general_election

:::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_New_Democratic_Party_candidates_in_the_2025_Ontario_general_election

:::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ontario_New_Democratic_Party_candidates_in_the_2022_Ontario_provincial_election

:::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eglinton%E2%80%94Lawrence_(provincial_electoral_district)

:::https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Martin

:::... with supporting evidence of media coverage from CBC News

:::For the record HumanWritesBook (talk) 02:05, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

:::****

:::In the journalistic cause of the true democracy of this Wikipedia movement i call to respectfully request for neutral users -- including, but not limited it, @Richard75, @Maxim, , @Sunshineisles2, @Johnsoniensis, @Werkwer@Tuckerresearch, @Senomo Drines @BaduFerreira, @Sosorrysalty! -- to kindly join this discussion -- one which I clearly suspect to be rooted in political-biased , censorship, and possible notes of apparent sockpuppetry . Sockpuppetry is not tolerated. All page information is fact, beyond the shadow of any doubt whatsoever. HumanWritesBook (talk) 01:46, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

::::

::: Note: We, as Wikipedia contributors, are not here to judge, we are here to document fact. these are the facts. We are here to ensure that all fact -- whether or not we may or may not individually "like" a thing and/or be in support of a thing --- the fact remains that a thing is a thing and that thing happened. We are not here to Censor information. We are not here to DELETE fact. In fact, censorship and the deletion of fact goes against everything that the Democracy of the Wikipedia Movement stands for.

::: I call for those three of you commenters who are here -- not to add to this Wikipedia Movement , but rather you are proving to takeaway from this non-governmental encyclopedic movement By We The People, For We The People -- for you @Bearcat and Co. are proven to clearly be invested in the censorship of relevant, valuable information from this Wikipedia Mission, by your unjust nomination to clear the record of a Black Canadian woman political figure and a public inspiration of promise for a young black girls across Canada *** Please see TVO report, [https://www.tvo.org/article/thats-how-you-do-it-black-women-in-ontario-politics-past-present-and-future Black women in Ontario politics — past, present, and future] , a 2022 article addressing the role that Black woman candidates serves to inspire Black female youth to consider entering politics after seeing Black woman as politcal candidates that look like them. "According to Velma Morgan, chair of [https://obvc.ca/ Operation Black Vote Canada] —an organization that supports the election of Black people to public office — while Black women run at rates roughly equal to those of Black men, they still run in lower numbers compared to other demographics. ... "politics was often portrayed as a corrupt old-boys’ club, and as a Black woman, the idea of running seemed almost unimaginable to her ... "Supporting Black candidates doesn’t simply affect government — a range of diverse candidates will likely increase the participation of diverse voters, says Tolley: “There is a definitive link between the presence of a more diverse range of people in public life and the desire and willingness of a broader range of voters to get involved and participate.” Tolley says there is evidence that, when members of historically underrepresented groups begin to run for office and get elected in larger numbers, that encourages voter participation. And there’s also a spin-off role-model effect, she adds, pointing to the fact that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama increased the desire of young women and Black people to participate in politics."...

::HumanWritesBook (talk) 01:46, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

::::Once again, "subject is a public figure" is not a notability claim in and of itself. People become notable by having WP:GNG-worthy reliable sourcing about their passage of specific defined inclusion criteria, like WP:NPOL for politicians or WP:NARTIST for artists, and just throwing the words "public figure" around like a weapon doesn't demonstrate that at all. The number of Wikipedia articles that happen to have a name in them is also not, in and of itself, a notability claim that entitles the person to an article either. The notability test hinges on certain specific markers of achievement and sourcing, not on the number of times their name can be found in other articles.

::::This article, as written, has not demonstrated her notability as an artist at all, as you have not shown any evidence of GNG-worthy media coverage about her art. You are trying to stake her notability entirely on a non-winning candidacy for political office — but, again, having been a non-winning candidate is not grounds for a Wikipedia article in and of itself. People in politics get Wikipedia articles by winning the election and thereby holding the office, not by running as a candidate in an election they withdrew from. There is simply no valid argument for notability as a politician here, because people become notable as politicians by holding notable political offices, not by pulling out of the race two weeks before election day.

::::You're not going to save this article by posting long screeds to this discussion about how she's a "public figure", or by falsely accusing me of "bias" when I've never shown one second of bias whatsoever — if you want to save this article, then you need to find and show better WP:GNG-worthy sourcing about her art to demonstrate that she would pass WP:NARTIST. The problem isn't that she's black, and the problem isn't that she's a woman — and if you want to accuse me of racism here, then check out who created our articles about Karen Chapman, Laurie Townshend, Virnetta Anderson, Myriam Magassouba, Traci Melchor, Kelly Fyffe-Marshall, Yasmine Mathurin and Alicia K. Harris. The problem is that a person (regardless of their gender or skin colour) has to hold office as a politician, not just run for office and then withdraw, to become notable as a politician — so to make Natasha Doyle-Merrick notable enough for a Wikipedia article, you need to establish that she's notable as an artist, not as a politician. Bearcat (talk) 02:12, 17 April 2025 (UTC)

:::::Thank you for your feedback. I agree that “Canadian politician” may not be the best descriptor since Natasha Doyle‑Merrick has never held elected office. However, I believe her article meets notability under the activist and artist criteria (WP:NACTIVIST / WP:NARTIST).

:::::– Artistic recognition: She’s had two solo exhibitions—one at Brick Lane Gallery in London, UK, and another at Cedar Ridge Gallery in Toronto—both supported by an Ontario Arts Council Exhibition Assistance Grant (recommended by the Nia Centre for the Arts).

:::::– Media coverage: Independent, reliable outlets have covered her work and advocacy, including the Toronto Star, CBC, Elle Canada, BlogTO, NOW Magazine, and the National Post.

:::::– Activism: She raised public awareness about race‑based hair discrimination through her resignation from the AGO Bistro, and she withdrew from the 2025 provincial race to consolidate the progressive vote—both widely reported events.

:::::Given this combination of institutional support and third‑party coverage, I respectfully request that the page be reframed around her roles as an activist and visual artist rather than deleted. Oceanmoonsun (talk) 03:24, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

::Hi Mpen320—thank you for your careful review. I’d like to clarify a few key points:

::Race‑based hair discrimination case:

::In 2019, Doyle‑Merrick resigned from the AGO Bistro after a staff member told her her natural hair “could scare customers.” This was extensively covered by The Toronto Star, discussed in ELLE Canada, and analyzed in the McGill Journal of Law and Health—far more than a “microaggression,” it prompted institutional discussions about hair discrimination.

::Biographical detail:

::Mentioning her father, Toronto rapper HDV, is purely contextual (much like other Wikipedia biographies). She even penned a Toronto Star op‑ed on how his influence shaped her community work.

::Artistic practice:

::She’s had an two exhibitions—one at Brick Lane Gallery in London, UK, another at Cedar Ridge Gallery in Toronto—covered by BlogTO. In January 2025 she received an Ontario Arts Council Exhibition Assistance Grant (recommended by the Nia Centre for the Arts), demonstrating peer‑reviewed support for her work.

::Electoral withdrawal and advocacy:

::Her decision to step aside in the 2025 Eglinton–Lawrence race was widely reported by the Canadian Press (syndicated in Coast Reporter), NOW Toronto, The Caribbean Camera, National Post, The Globe and Mail, and The Toronto Star, and even came up during the Ontario leaders’ debate. That act of strategic voting itself became a form of public advocacy—and it set a precedent: shortly afterward, a Liberal candidate in Windsor and a Green Party candidate also withdrew to avoid vote‑splitting, demonstrating a growing willingness among contenders to prioritize collective outcomes over individual campaigns.

::Conclusion:

::Between her coverage in independent, reliable outlets, receipt of a peer‑reviewed Ontario Arts Council grant, and sustained activism on issues like race‑based hair discrimination and strategic voting, Natasha Doyle‑Merrick clearly satisfies WP:GNG, WP:NACTIVIST, and WP:NARTIST. I therefore recommend reframing her article around her work as an activist and visual artist—tightening citations and removing any promotional language—rather than deleting it. Oceanmoonsun (talk) 03:57, 20 April 2025 (UTC)

• Delete - Fails WP:ARTIST. She has not been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, or won significant critical attention, or been represented within the permanent collections of any notable galleries or museums. Seems more like WP:PROMO. As mentioned above, the subject only ran for office, but was not elected. Fails WP:NPOL. --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 22:29, 19 April 2025 (UTC)
• :I don’t believe the page necessarily needs to be deleted — perhaps it just needs to be restructured to avoid WP:PROMO concerns and better align with notability guidelines. Natasha Doyle-Merrick has been covered in reliable, independent sources, including the Toronto Star, Elle Canada, BlogTO, CBC, NOW Magazine, and the National Post.
• :She was involved in a widely publicized case concerning alleged racism at the Art Gallery of Ontario, which was covered by multiple mainstream outlets. Additionally, she is a grant recipient from the Ontario Arts Council and has received institutional support from organizations such as the Nia Centre for the Arts.
• :Her advocacy work during the Ontario election — including publicly stepping away from the race and writing about her experiences, personal background (including her relationship with her father HDV), and deep community ties to Lawrence Heights — was also covered in several outlets.
• :Given this, I believe there is enough verifiable coverage to support notability, particularly under WP:NACTIVIST or WP:NARTIST. I would support revising the article to better reflect her public impact and remove any promotional tone — but I don’t think deletion is necessary. Oceanmoonsun (talk) 03:14, 20 April 2025 (UTC)
• Comment. I want to flag for the closer what I believe is a violation of WP:CANVASS by HumanWritesBook in this AfD.--Mpen320 (talk) 15:09, 21 April 2025 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.