Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian MacDonald (architect) (2nd nomination)

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. Owen× ☎ 19:28, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ian MacDonald (architect)

Ian MacDonald (architect) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Canada. 🔥Jalapeño🔥 Stupid stuff I did 12:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, per previous AfD. I'm not sure the nominator has done WP:BEFORE. Articles such as [1] and [2] should be sufficient (as well as the long list of articles going back to 1997 on MacDonald's company website). However, the awards were won by his company, Ian MacDonald Architect Inc., so I don't think they can be ascribed to him personally. Sionk (talk) 13:27, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Businesspeople. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:34, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep but only after reviewing Sionk's sources. The previous AfD bases his notability off of the Canadian encyclopedia, but I cannot track down their editorial policy as to whether it's a reliable source. The article itself is a mess and the sources there don't demonstrate notability per the GNG. I haven't performed an additional BEFORE to see what else can be added to the article since Sionk's sources are good in my book, but it really needs to be cleaned up - I would not have accepted it if it were at AfC. SportingFlyer T·C 00:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting for further sources evaluation.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – The two sources presented by Sionk are enough to satisfy me. While there is interview content, there is also secondary content in the sourcing. TLA^tlak 23:56, 19 March 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.