Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Germain

=[[:Anthony Germain]]=

:{{la|1=Anthony Germain}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Anthony Germain}})

Fails WP:POLITICIAN and WP:GNG. After the recount, he is now a failed candidate for office, which is not notable enough for an article of his own. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 22:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Politicians. Jeffrey34555 (talk) 22:46, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Delete per nom. Zinderboff (talk) 05:13, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep famous career with the CBC. Rushtheeditor (talk) 05:40, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Delete per Zinderboff. Because he lost the election, this article will not be qualified and fails GNG. Steam5 (talk) 06:20, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep as a well-known CBC journalist. This article has been improved a lot since creation. Moondragon21 (talk) 12:29, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

:Keep. A notable journalist. The article has multiple good sources, and more can surely be found based on his career hosting a number of notable shows. I think we're getting a little too hung up on the fact that he was a candidate in an election - he was notable before that. MediaKyle (talk) 12:49, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

:Keep. Echoing MediaKyle's comment. He was notable beforehand, but the fact he lost so narrowly after a judicial recount adds to that notoriety. MauriceYMichaud (talk) 14:57, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Keep. Although he lost the recount and thus isn't notable as a politician per se, he already had preexisting notability as a journalist before jumping into politics — seriously, Canadians have known his name since the 1990s, and the fact that nobody got around to creating the article until he appeared to have won election as an MP isn't relevant. Article does need some improvement, but he had preexisting notability as a journalist long before narrowly losing an election — so I've already reformatted it to place more emphasis and improved sourcing on the journalism. Bearcat (talk) 15:09, 24 May 2025 (UTC)

Strong keep per Bearcat, MediaKyle and others. — stickguy (:^›)— || talk || 18:25, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep. Losing an election is irrelevant to WP:NPOL since the article subject has established notability prior to involvement in politics. ZachH007 (talk) 18:28, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. — stickguy (:^›)— || talk || 18:32, 24 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep This person seems to meet the WP:GNG. There are arguments that since he lost his race that makes him not notable but there seems to be sufficient RSes to justify notability independent from just his political career. Gjb0zWxOb (talk) 06:09, 27 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep Thought I'd be a delete going into this one but if you remove all of the political content, he's notable as a journalist. SportingFlyer T·C 23:42, 28 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep Even setting his journalism career aside, people are misinterpreting the notability policy when they say "If a candidate in a hotly contested race loses, they no longer merit an article". That's not quite it: if this was an unusual race generating enduring coverage of the losing candidate, they can still pass WP:NBIO and WP:NEVENT. Anyways, he's independently notable per Bearcat. Flip^and Flopped ㋡ 14:17, 30 May 2025 (UTC)