974:. The case is now sufficiently notable that the public has a right to a balanced account. That being said, this is only a small part of this woman's life and an article under her name would be problematic for all the reasons mentioned above. I suggest renaming the article something like "The Holmes-Advertisement Controversy". (Perhaps someone can find a better title, ideally one that doesn't use her name, though the fact that Holmes is not this woman's professional name may mitigate that problem.)
31:
1015:: She appears on Fox TV, Mayo has edited her Patient Story, she's been mentioned in the Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail, the Vancouver Sun, the Canadian Press, the Halifax Chronicle Herald, Bloomberg, the Calgary Herald, the Ottawa Citizen, Fox Business, The Guardian (.co.uk). It might be "one event" but the clear response to "one event" is rename, not delete. -
1034:-- since those who voiced a delete opinion, based on BLP1E, mainly did so before the article was expanded, and generally haven't returned here, to meaningfully address the counter-arguments, I'd like to request their opinions be discounted, because this is supposed to be a discussion -- not a vote. These
626:
It's the fact that the comment by the person is just stupid. I said it was fishy I didn't accuse you. First, it's really fishy that a persons first edit is on a deletion debate. Which more ip user don't even do let alone the first edit they make. Either way this page is going to get deleted because
584:
The ip users comment is very fishy since not only was it the persons first edit, but only seconds after Geo Swans. Second if you are getting facts from wikipedia and you trust it you need to really look at wikipedia again because no university will accept facts from wikipedia. Nevertheless the fact
508:
of is notable, but that doesn't mean that she is — which is proven by the fact that this article is almost entirely about the advertisement she filmed, and contains almost no biographical information whatsoever. Perhaps an article about the advertising campaign itself might be in order — but absent
367:
It seems to me that when there are multiple potential targets for a merge and redirection that is a very strong counter-argument to merging, it is a very strong argument that the topic of the article is of sufficient notability that it should remain a stand-alone article, and should not be merged.
894:
Since you still don't get it I'll quote the page "Knowledge (XXG) is not a newspaper. The bare fact that someone has been in the news does not in itself imply that they should be the subject of an encyclopedia entry. Where a person is mentioned by name in a
Knowledge (XXG) article about a larger
823:
TY Geo Swan (next time sign your posts) you still don't get it. YOU DON'T get an article if you are in the news. These stories are middle in the newspaper articles not the front page stuff she's getting because of her ad. If see is so important why did you create the article years after these
196:-- Here is a reference I found today, to an article about Palmira Holmes, a fellow resident of the town were Shona Holmes lived, who has been inundated with calls from other Canadians outraged over Shona's apparent betrayal of Canada. A wikipedia article about Palmira Holmes would be a
603:
Are you accusing me of being a sockpuppet master? In my five years of contributing to the wikipedia I have faced three or four irresponsible and unsubstantiated accusations that I am a sockpuppet or sockpuppet master. But I declare this is the the one with slimmest justification.
389:
explans. The only reason why see is getting this coverage is because of the health care reform in the US and therefore either deserves to be deleted or linked to their. She is a part of the debate on health card reform and that's where the info
565:-- What makes wikipedia useful is that when, in a debate with some fox news viewers, this woman I've never heard of before is mentioned, I can get a quick summary of the facts from a source that I can trust. Keep, keep, keep. --
1044:
are supposed to be discussions where there is a meaningful exchange of views. I am going to suggest this article be relisted, to get the opinions of individuals who have read the article in its current state.
247:
Palmira Holmes has been inundated with phone calls from people trying to express their fury over Shona Holmes' decision to become the face of an aggressive
American TV ad that slams Canadian-style health
708:
I never called anyone stupid. You purposely are putting words in my mouth (this is the second time). I said the comment was stupid and I have every right to say that a comment someone made is stupid.--
1091:
Not to mention the fact the article doesn't even mention where she was born, her birthdate, or even her age. Even if you google them you get nothing. No one knows or cares because she's not notable.--
1112:
to somewhere appropriate. This woman is a pawn in the healthcare debate, she is not personally notable. Sueing over medical treatment does not make someone worthy of an encyclopedia entry.
146:
288:
316:
260:
543:
May I remind everyone that the wikipedia is not solely an
American project? There is a separate, different debate triggered by Holmes claims up here in Canada.
40:
1001:, per Buck's reasoning. If she has a nasty divorce, it doesn't belong in here...make the article more clearly about the advertisement and her medical context.
359:
486:- Not notable and the ad she was in has more to do with Patients United Now's efforts to block/direct U.S. health care reform than her specifically. --
343:
176:
154:
734:
But, if that were true, why is it the following articles which discuss her precedent setting court case don't mention the US health care debate?
871:
she appeared in the US ad. As I pointed out above those references were to her lawsuit against the government of
Ontario. I suggest this is a
853:. Could you please show me the courtesy of trying to actually read what I wrote before you respond? The four references I cited above date to
957:
342:-- If, for the sake of argument, there was a strong argument for merging this article into another article, why would we merge it into
566:
740:"Patients suing province over wait times: Man, woman who couldn't get quick treatment travelled to U.S. to get brain tumours removed"
17:
1159:
184:
661:
Have you heard of proxy servers. I bet you have. I'll come back with a message that says I'm from Japan then from one in France.--
113:
108:
153:
This person doesn't deserve to have her own page. She isn't notably in any way and should either be deleted or merged into the
117:
100:
585:
that you are in the news DOES NOT mean you get an article. Which you can't seem to get Geo Swan. Please read this again
1121:
1141:
758:
65:
46:
353:
645:? In the interests of your credibility you might consider using it before you accuse anyone else of sockpuppetry.
895:
subject, but essentially remains a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them."--
762:
1140:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
64:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
759:"New lawsuit threatens Ontario private care ban: "Ontario Chaoulli" case seeks to catalyze healthcare reform"
1113:
961:
570:
331:
303:
275:
956:
Obvious BLP1E. Besides, the article doesn't even make any effort to assert her (nonexistent) notability.
800:
1126:
1100:
1084:
1054:
1024:
1005:
992:
965:
949:
904:
886:
833:
717:
701:
670:
654:
636:
613:
598:
574:
552:
530:
495:
478:
474:
457:
442:
421:
399:
377:
333:
305:
277:
225:
188:
166:
82:
491:
1079:
944:
1092:
896:
838:
825:
709:
662:
628:
590:
487:
391:
158:
1050:
1020:
882:
697:
650:
609:
548:
438:
373:
236:
221:
920:
841:, here on the wikipedia we are supposed to reach decisions through cool, meaningful, collegial,
586:
501:
466:
451:
197:
1096:
1066:
I have seen the changes and as can only be expected it is still only about the event not her.
900:
849:. They do their best to confine their comments to editorial matters. I read what you wrote,
829:
713:
666:
632:
594:
526:
417:
395:
324:
296:
268:
162:
104:
78:
58:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
589:. Holmes is only getting coverage because of the fact there is a health care reform in US. --
845:. This means that those who comply with the wikipedia's civility policies do their best to
776:
470:
180:
386:
1067:
975:
932:
732:"Holmes is only getting coverage because of the fact there is a health care reform in US."
200:. But Shona Holmes has multiple claims to notability, beyond her appearance in the ad:
1002:
796:
1153:
1046:
1016:
878:
693:
646:
605:
544:
535:
Excuse me, you refer to just a single debate. But surely there are multiple debates?
434:
369:
217:
1038:
743:
522:
413:
232:
96:
88:
642:
134:
688:
You called the IP post "fishy" because it came "seconds" after mine. It came
454:
362:-- her youtube video is, after all, part of a comparison of the two systems...
739:
212:
there are the comments in reaction from senior
Canadian political leaders;
208:
there is the strength of the feeling of betrayal from ordinary
Canadians;
780:
404:
Because what she's "notable" for is an advertisement which aired in the
509:
other proof of notability, we don't particularly need an article about
179:. Don't think it deserves its own article but should be mentioned.
385:
Rememeber someone isn't notable because shes in the news as this
1134:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
777:"Auditor says Ontario should post wait times for every surgeon"
684:. Doing so never helps cultivates reasoned civil discussion.
25:
204:
there is the discussion over the credibility of her claim;
627:
the people that know wikipedia guidelines agree with me.--
500:
Certainly worth mentioning somewhere, but essentially a
689:
141:
130:
126:
122:
797:"Patients Sue for Private Health Insurance in Ontario"
216:there is the Democrats Abroad counter-reaction.
68:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1144:). No further edits should be made to this page.
289:list of Medicine-related deletion discussions
8:
877:from the US ad, by any reasonable measure.
157:. I feel we should just delete this article
317:list of People-related deletion discussions
261:list of Canada-related deletion discussions
360:Canadian and American health care compared
311:
283:
255:
847:actually read what the other person wrote
315:: This debate has been included in the
287:: This debate has been included in the
259:: This debate has been included in the
1032:Note to potential closing administrator
344:Health care reform in the United States
177:Health care reform in the United States
155:Health care reform in the United States
45:For an explanation of the process, see
356:-- Holmes is, after all, a Canadian...
678:Please don't call other contributors
433:-- for the reasons I offered above.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
919:She is not notable; the events are:
692:after mine. That is 480 seconds.
24:
231:Carmela Fragomeni (2009-07-23).
41:deletion review on 2009 August 9
29:
47:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
233:"You have the wrong S. Holmes"
1:
927:to an appropriate article or
824:stories. BECAUSE OF HER AD.--
408:pertaining to a debate about
517:to an appropriate target or
795:Kevin Gaudet (2007-12-01).
763:National Review of Medicine
738:Tanya Talaga (2007-09-06).
354:Canadian health care system
1176:
1127:02:41, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
1101:12:07, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
1085:05:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
757:Sam Solomon (2007-09-30).
718:12:02, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
83:13:44, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
1055:15:58, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
1025:00:39, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
1006:04:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
993:00:31, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
966:22:54, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
950:06:10, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
905:23:33, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
887:13:04, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
834:06:03, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
702:16:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
671:06:06, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
655:05:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
637:04:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
614:03:54, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
599:02:33, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
575:01:43, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
553:01:31, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
531:16:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
496:14:45, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
479:05:12, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
458:18:52, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
443:16:06, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
422:16:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
400:21:50, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
378:16:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
334:15:58, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
306:15:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
278:15:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
226:15:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
189:11:47, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
167:07:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
1160:Pages at deletion review
1137:Please do not modify it.
61:Please do not modify it.
641:Have you ever heard of
1013:Strong Keep-or-Rename
504:. The debate she's a
412:health care reform.
851:blp1e, blp1e, blp1e
801:Canadian Free Press
761:. Vol. 4, no. 16.
730:Nominator claims:
237:Hamilton Spectator
73:The result was
1083:
948:
336:
320:
308:
292:
280:
264:
53:
52:
39:was subject to a
1167:
1139:
1124:
1120:
1116:
1077:
1075:
1072:
1043:
1037:
999:Keep, but rename
990:
984:
980:
942:
940:
937:
843:civil discussion
810:
808:
807:
791:
789:
788:
772:
770:
769:
753:
751:
750:
346:, as opposed to:
327:
321:
299:
293:
271:
265:
250:
244:
243:
144:
138:
120:
63:
33:
32:
26:
1175:
1174:
1170:
1169:
1168:
1166:
1165:
1164:
1150:
1149:
1148:
1142:deletion review
1135:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1073:
1068:
1041:
1035:
986:
982:
976:
938:
933:
865:-- over a year
805:
803:
794:
786:
784:
775:
767:
765:
756:
748:
746:
737:
325:
297:
269:
241:
239:
230:
187:
140:
111:
95:
92:
66:deletion review
59:
37:This discussion
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1173:
1171:
1163:
1162:
1152:
1151:
1147:
1146:
1130:
1129:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1088:
1087:
1058:
1057:
1028:
1027:
1009:
1008:
969:
968:
953:
952:
916:
915:
914:
913:
912:
911:
910:
909:
908:
907:
874:separate event
816:
815:
814:
813:
812:
811:
792:
773:
754:
727:
726:
725:
724:
723:
722:
721:
720:
705:
704:
658:
657:
619:
618:
617:
616:
578:
577:
556:
555:
538:
537:
536:
498:
481:
460:
445:
427:
426:
425:
424:
402:
365:
364:
363:
357:
348:
347:
337:
309:
281:
253:
252:
251:
191:
183:
151:
150:
91:
86:
71:
70:
54:
51:
50:
44:
34:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1172:
1161:
1158:
1157:
1155:
1145:
1143:
1138:
1132:
1131:
1128:
1125:
1117:
1111:
1108:
1107:
1102:
1098:
1094:
1090:
1089:
1086:
1081:
1076:
1071:
1065:
1062:
1061:
1060:
1059:
1056:
1052:
1048:
1040:
1033:
1030:
1029:
1026:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1011:
1010:
1007:
1004:
1000:
997:
996:
995:
994:
991:
989:
985:
979:
973:
967:
963:
959:
958:195.14.197.53
955:
954:
951:
946:
941:
936:
930:
926:
922:
918:
917:
906:
902:
898:
893:
890:
889:
888:
884:
880:
876:
875:
870:
869:
864:
863:
858:
857:
852:
848:
844:
840:
837:
836:
835:
831:
827:
822:
821:
820:
819:
818:
817:
802:
798:
793:
782:
778:
774:
764:
760:
755:
745:
741:
736:
735:
733:
729:
728:
719:
715:
711:
707:
706:
703:
699:
695:
691:
690:eight minutes
687:
683:
682:
677:
674:
673:
672:
668:
664:
660:
659:
656:
652:
648:
644:
640:
639:
638:
634:
630:
625:
624:
623:
622:
621:
620:
615:
611:
607:
602:
601:
600:
596:
592:
588:
583:
580:
579:
576:
572:
568:
564:
561:
560:
559:
554:
550:
546:
542:
539:
534:
533:
532:
528:
524:
520:
516:
512:
507:
503:
499:
497:
493:
489:
485:
482:
480:
476:
472:
468:
464:
461:
459:
456:
453:
449:
446:
444:
440:
436:
432:
429:
428:
423:
419:
415:
411:
407:
406:United States
403:
401:
397:
393:
388:
384:
381:
380:
379:
375:
371:
366:
361:
358:
355:
352:
351:
350:
349:
345:
341:
338:
335:
332:
329:
328:
318:
314:
310:
307:
304:
301:
300:
290:
286:
282:
279:
276:
273:
272:
262:
258:
254:
249:
238:
234:
229:
228:
227:
223:
219:
215:
211:
207:
203:
199:
195:
192:
190:
186:
182:
178:
174:
171:
170:
169:
168:
164:
160:
156:
148:
143:
136:
132:
128:
124:
119:
115:
110:
106:
102:
98:
94:
93:
90:
87:
85:
84:
80:
76:
69:
67:
62:
56:
55:
48:
42:
38:
35:
28:
27:
19:
1136:
1133:
1109:
1069:
1063:
1031:
1012:
998:
987:
981:
977:
971:
970:
934:
928:
924:
891:
873:
872:
867:
866:
861:
860:
855:
854:
850:
846:
842:
804:. Retrieved
785:. Retrieved
783:. 2008-10-08
766:. Retrieved
747:. Retrieved
744:Toronto Star
731:
685:
680:
679:
675:
581:
567:69.134.163.9
562:
557:
540:
518:
514:
510:
505:
483:
462:
447:
430:
409:
405:
382:
339:
326:Juliancolton
323:
312:
298:Juliancolton
295:
284:
270:Juliancolton
267:
256:
246:
240:. Retrieved
213:
209:
205:
201:
193:
172:
152:
97:Shona Holmes
89:Shona Holmes
79:Sean Whitton
75:no consensus
74:
72:
60:
57:
36:
643:reverse DNS
471:Niteshift36
181:Jujutacular
806:2009-07-27
787:2009-07-27
768:2009-07-27
749:2009-07-27
390:belongs.--
242:2009-07-25
1003:Sherurcij
923:. Either
450:- As per
1154:Category
1047:Geo Swan
1017:BalthCat
921:WP:BLP1E
879:Geo Swan
781:CBC News
694:Geo Swan
647:Geo Swan
606:Geo Swan
587:WP:BLP1E
582:Comment'
545:Geo Swan
502:WP:BLP1E
467:WP:BLP1E
452:WP:BIO1E
435:Geo Swan
410:American
370:Geo Swan
218:Geo Swan
185:contribs
147:View log
1123:Windows
1093:Fire 55
1064:Comment
897:Fire 55
892:Comment
839:Fire 55
826:Fire 55
710:Fire 55
663:Fire 55
629:Fire 55
591:Fire 55
541:Comment
523:Bearcat
488:Ctbwiki
414:Bearcat
392:Fire 55
383:Comment
340:Comment
194:Comment
159:Fire 55
114:protect
109:history
1115:Fences
1070:Double
972:Rename
935:Double
929:delete
868:before
681:stupid
519:delete
484:Delete
463:Delete
448:Delete
142:delete
118:delete
1119:&
1110:Merge
925:merge
515:Merge
455:Panyd
248:care.
198:BLP1E
175:with
173:Merge
145:) – (
135:views
127:watch
123:links
16:<
1097:talk
1080:talk
1074:Blue
1051:talk
1021:talk
978:Buck
962:talk
945:talk
939:Blue
901:talk
883:talk
862:2008
859:and
856:2007
830:talk
714:talk
698:talk
667:talk
651:talk
633:talk
610:talk
595:talk
571:talk
563:Keep
558:Her
549:talk
527:talk
506:part
492:talk
475:talk
439:talk
431:Keep
418:talk
396:talk
387:link
374:talk
322:-- –
313:Note
294:-- –
285:Note
266:-- –
257:Note
222:talk
163:talk
131:logs
105:talk
101:edit
1039:afd
988:ofg
983:ets
676:(1)
511:her
214:(4)
210:(3)
206:(2)
202:(1)
77:. —
1156::
1099:)
1053:)
1042:}}
1036:{{
1023:)
964:)
931:.
903:)
885:)
832:)
799:.
779:.
742:.
716:)
700:)
669:)
653:)
635:)
612:)
597:)
573:)
551:)
529:)
521:.
513:.
494:)
477:)
469:.
465:.
441:)
420:)
398:)
376:)
330:|
319:.
302:|
291:.
274:|
263:.
245:.
235:.
224:)
165:)
133:|
129:|
125:|
121:|
116:|
112:|
107:|
103:|
81:/
43:.
1095:(
1082:)
1078:(
1049:(
1019:(
960:(
947:)
943:(
899:(
881:(
828:(
809:.
790:.
771:.
752:.
712:(
696:(
686:2
665:(
649:(
631:(
608:(
593:(
569:(
547:(
525:(
490:(
473:(
437:(
416:(
394:(
372:(
220:(
161:(
149:)
139:(
137:)
99:(
49:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.