Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lily Cheng

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The result was Withdrawn by nominator. (non-admin closure) BangJan1999 16:40, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lily Cheng[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Does not appear meet WP:POLITICIAN or WP:GNG. BangJan1999 20:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Politics, and Canada. BangJan1999 20:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It's true that the article was created in an inadequate form — basically "Lily Cheng is a city councillor who exists, the end" — by an occasional editor who's made less than 100 Wikipedia edits in the entire last six years combined, but it is entirely improvable. Toronto is a global city whose city councillors are considered to pass WP:NPOL #2 as long as there's some actual substance and proper reliable sourcing in the article, and sourcing does exist to upgrade it with. With just 20 minutes of work on it, I've already upgraded it significantly. Bearcat (talk) 22:34, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per MOS:Canada#Municipal politics members of Toronto City Council are automatically considered notable by virtue of position.

"City councillors are deemed notable just for being city councillors only in "major metropolitan cities"; in the Canadian context, present consensus has applied this only to Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Toronto, Ottawa and Montreal." —WildComet ^talk 02:43, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per above and Bearcat showing it can be an article. Skynxnex (talk) 02:56, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Article looks a lot better than before, therefor I'll withdraw my nomination. BangJan1999 16:41, 26 October 2022 (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.