hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Stereotypes of Nigerians: FMSky ( talk ) 12:22, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Unsure - I think it can be argued both ways as there are sources but they're not all talking about the same thing (for example I found one talking about gender stereotypes in Nigerian films).  I'm not sure how one would write a page such as this without a considerable amount of subjective opinion and WP:SYNTH .  JMWt ( talk ) 13:38, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups and Nigeria .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:23, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ♠ PMC ♠ (talk) 11:32, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Sure there are sources, but most are one-liners, then what appear to be OR refuting the claim.  I mean I don't doubt that Nigerians can speak English, but it's poorly sourced...  It should be fairly obvious in Nigerian English-language media, should it not?  I can see the value of the article, but sourcing just doesn't help.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:56, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You'd almost need a sociology paper in a peer-reviewed journal that talks about the stereotypes, not mentions here and there from the press, to be able to make a decent wiki article...  Just my thoughts.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:58, 21 September 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Yerly Palma: I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:27, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Cuba .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:27, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:35, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 13:24, 13 August 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete
2022 Isfara missile attacks: Fumikas Sagisavas ( talk ) 13:06, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan .  Fumikas Sagisavas ( talk ) 13:06, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Fumikas Sagisavas Feed those sources into a machine translator and you’ll see they say absolutely nothing whatsoever about any missile attacks.  Classic WP:SNEAKY trick.  The infobox and body are self-contradictory.  Because there was no missile attack (let alone two).  Only some shooting and shelling which is already covered by an article .  The use of ballistic missile attacks in a border skirmish would be highly notable and attract coverage outside the region.  Thus I decided to call it “blatant” since thirty seconds of critical reading (even without checking the sources) will indicate the highly sus nature of the page.  RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk ) 13:43, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per RadioactiveBoulevardier with a lean toward WP:SPEEDY under WP:A11 .  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 14:19, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] G5 may also apply, as nom pointed out on their talk page.  RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk ) 16:38, 17 August 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete
C.B. Satpathy: So I'm raising this for discussion here.  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish ) 13:37, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India .  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish ) 13:37, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment if the AfD process agrees it does meets notability, can I request an admin create a redirect from Chandra Bhanu Satpathy to C.B. Satpathy per our normal policy?  If it doesn't meet notability, I think we might consider following the same process on the new article page, seeing as it's just an extension of the previous attempts at promotion, now under a different name.  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish ) 13:39, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Odisha .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:05, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:41, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No sourcing found, wow does this read like a PROMO for the individual.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:29, 25 October 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete
YMCA Camp Flaming Arrow: Editor10293813 ( talk ) 22:16, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:41, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - It was a big deal in its time and place (San Antonio, Texas area).   Due to the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, compounded by other problems, the camp closed permanently in 2021.  — Maile ( talk ) 19:19, 1 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete As well as the source referenced in the article, I have also found this article from the San Antonio Report about its closure.  Two reliable sources, but all they really say about the camp itself is that it existed and that it's closing due to financial issues.  The articles really touched me, it seems a real shame for the community to have lost such a valuable resource, but I don't think it passes the "significant" part of the GNG.  pinktoebeans (talk) 20:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Very Weak Delete .   The other source for the closing looks to be A San Antonio Express News article .   I also found a listing in Texas Outdoor Adventure Guide for Kids [1] which looks like fairly substantial coverage to me.   A search of newspaper archives found plenty of routine coverage and some more substantial coverage that on closer inspection is YMCA generated content on sponsored pages (i.e. adds disguised as newspaper articles).   Very little of the coverage available is both substantial and independent which is a definite shame.  Eluchil404 ( talk ) 05:16, 7 January 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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Jack Parsons (producer): Yoblyblob ( Talk ) :) 19:29, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and United Kingdom .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:51, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:SIGCOV , WP:NOTINHERITED , and WP:MILL .  One sources is by definition not coverage in multiple sources.  There's no major legacy here.  Merely being a producer does not automatically inherit notability.  Producers are dime a dozen, and for that reason we often delete their articles.  Delete lacks in depth coverage.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 12:56, 30 April 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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Escobar Gallardo: Spinixster (chat!) 10:26, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy ,  and Television .  Spinixster (chat!) 10:26, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Nip/Tuck § Main cast ; otherwise, leave the rest to Fandom .  -- Slgrandson ( How's my egg-throwing coleslaw? ) 17:07, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  The character doesn't seem to have enough sources to establish individual notability.  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 18:37, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not enough sources to establish separate notability under WP:GNG .  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 03:03, 7 July 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Vysakh Reetha: Some sources do not constitute significant coverage as he is mentioned in passing while the rest are not reliable sources.  CNMall41 ( talk ) 07:38, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Actors and filmmakers , Malaysia ,  and India .  CNMall41 ( talk ) 07:38, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:29, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  WP:FILMMAKER not passing till now Worldiswide ( talk ) 04:52, 24 October 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Silas Namatak: Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 16:02, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Oceania .  Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 16:02, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:32, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:41, 22 June 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Neo Shifters: signed, Rosguill talk 15:41, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy and Toys .  signed, Rosguill talk 15:41, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Concur that what we have is not good enough for mainspace; fails WP:GNG Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 07:51, 21 February 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.

Discussion outcome: delete
John Pelloe: Middle ranking Anglican clerics do not have assumed notability JMWt ( talk ) 09:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and England .  JMWt ( talk ) 09:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 15:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 15:51, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment What do the sources in the article--mostly offline--say about him?  It'd be premature to say that this should be deleted when we have sources that aren't obviously improper: Someone added them to the article at some point.  Jclemens ( talk ) 08:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Two are notifications of appointment, one is in a directory of all clergy.  The only source which could count towards notability is presence in Who Was Who .  JMWt ( talk ) 18:53, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  06:19, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Allfather (Benison) ( talk ) 06:59, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete unless an editor can find significant coverage of this cleric in independent, reliable sources.  Cullen328 ( talk ) 07:41, 28 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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Akbar Shandermani: Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 12:20, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I can’t read Farsi but he may be a GNG pass.  A Google books search brings up his name in multiple publications though I can’t judge which are in-depth or independent.  Mccapra ( talk ) 12:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Mccapra Yes, these are things I did as WP:BEFORE , they're mostly not about him directly but about events he's involved in or something of that nature.  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 13:11, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Iran .  Shellwood ( talk ) 13:03, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:34, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:54, 27 May 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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Leighton van Wyk: JTtheOG ( talk ) 06:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union ,  and South Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 06:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG .  No suitable redirect per WP:ATD .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 18:42, 23 April 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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Mia Hammermann: I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 06:53, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Europe .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 06:53, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 09:52, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Page has no viable third party source thus no evidence of notability.  The only source provided no longer exists.  TheBritinator ( talk ) 01:40, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Fails WP:GNG Whitemancanjump23 ( talk ) 04:55, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] OK to delete .  Found actual passing mentions only in what actually is routine match coverage at lie:zeit .  Cielquiparle ( talk ) 21:10, 30 July 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Ranji H. Nagaswami: Fails WP:BIO as references are just press releases and an interview.  Article creator seems to be WP:SPA to advertise Yale Alumni.  Imcdc Contact 09:07, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Businesspeople ,  and Finance .  Imcdc Contact 09:07, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , professional profile, WP:NOTLINKEDIN .  — siro χ o 09:12, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:21, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Subject seems borderline notable but no substantial independent editorial media coverage is here.  If it exists it should be added and resubmitted.  WilsonP NYC ( talk ) 21:03, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - non-notable subject.  Very little coverage exists.  Upper Deck Guy ( talk ) 19:07, 20 August 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Organization of the New York City Fire Department: The appropriate information could be added to the article New York City Fire Department (or relevant parent article) with this as a redirect.  ... disco spinster talk 18:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions .  ... disco spinster talk 18:03, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I'd be more inclined to keep this if it had better sourcing.  Very extensive, but could all be OR.  I honestly can't find sources with this level of details.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 18:41, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Since your Canadian please look at the Toronto Fire Services page to see what you think and if something like that should be done for the FDNY page?  Tom950 ( talk ) 21:50, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't see what an editor's nationality has to do with a discussion on deleting an article.  If your editing, Tom950 , is based on your nationality, perhaps a neutral-point-of-view encyclopedia isn't the best place for you.  Owen× ☎ 22:15, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge sourced portions, if any, with New York City Fire Department and Chicago Fire Department , respectively.  Owen× ☎ 20:43, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] When it comes to the Los Angeles Fire Department page and the Toronto Fire Services page everything is on one page.  Besides individuals who have an interest in firefighting enjoy reading this type of stuff.  Tom950 ( talk ) 21:49, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There are other places where this specific information might be more appropriate, such as Fandom (e.g. Fire.fandom.com ).  General encyclopedias do not go into this level of detail.  If you'll notice, there aren't articles about the company organization of, e.g. Apple or Walmart or other types of organizations.  ... disco spinster talk 22:19, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge sourced portions with New York City Fire Department and Chicago Fire Department per OwenX.  While this needs quite a bit of work to be salvageable, I will note that sources do exist for some of these fire stations, if not other parts of the articles - for example, many of the NYC fire stations are mentioned in the AIA Guide to New York City and the Guide to New York City Landmarks for their historical significance - so it may be worth splitting off the fire stations to their own lists.  – Epicgenius ( talk ) 16:57, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete It seems to need to be deleted unless by adding more related adequate sources; or perhaps at most, it can be merged in a related page.  Ali Ahwazi ( talk ) 08:15, 3 December 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete
Copper City, Glenn County, California: No mention or evidence of this location has been found anywhere to show that it was populated; known only from a GNIS entry (which does not establish notability).   This is one of dozens of similar stub articles on nonexistent or non-notable California locations created by the same user during a short period in 2009, based only on GNIS entries.   Another user has added two references since my PROD, but neither one mentions Copper City at all.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 18:35, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and California .  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 18:35, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] delete Searching is heavily masked by the other much more notable spot in Shasta County, about which there is considerable material; in contrast, the one citation in the article which leads to anything other than listings is to a (dead) genealogical site, which cites nothing itself.  The reliability of these is very dicey.  Mangoe ( talk ) 02:45, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - There just ain't no there there.  A mining camp that according to the article "dissipated nearly as quickly as it sprung up" is not any kind of actual community, much less one with the legal recognition required by GEOLAND.  FOARP ( talk ) 13:33, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  I initially contested the PROD but the online paper trail as of 2023 is too thin to defend it.  Au revoir, Copper City, Glenn County (originally Colusa County).  jengod ( talk ) 22:09, 31 October 2023 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete