The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:23, 18 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Yvan Roy (justice) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)

(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article does probably barely pass WP:JUDGE, but comprehensively fails WP:GNG and should therefore be deleted. This is the overarching consensus, I believe. Paul Vaurie ( talk) 06:43, 11 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Paul Vaurie ( talk) 06:43, 11 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Paul Vaurie ( talk) 06:43, 11 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Paul Vaurie ( talk) 06:43, 11 October 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Paul Vaurie ( talk) 06:43, 11 October 2021 (UTC) reply

• Keep: Because the individual holds a federal judicial position, they pass WP:JUDGE, and per WP:SNG this should be sufficient to presume notability. / Tpdwkouaa ( talk) 07:27, 11 October 2021 (UTC) reply
• Keep - nominator asserts the subject meets the requirements of an SNG, but fails GNG. Meeting the requirements of the SNG would usually be enough, but I also don't agree that the subject fails GNG. His judgements have been written about, and (almost by default) form part of the enduring historical record because of the combination of single-justice judgements and precedence. But there are also a number of news articles that give coverage to his judicial opinions. In fact, the article has 10 references for 6 lines of text. St★lwart ¹¹¹ 10:10, 11 October 2021 (UTC) reply
• Keep. Judges at this level are notable, and coverage can always be found for them if one knows where to look and how to search. BD2412 T 19:49, 11 October 2021 (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.