hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Minor characters in the Seafort Saga : Fails WP:NLIST / WP:GNG .  We don't even have list of characters in the Seafort Saga .  I suggest delete or merge to Seafort_Saga#Characters .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:12, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Science fiction and fantasy .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:12, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:23, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Not enough reception or analysis to pass WP:SIGCOV .  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 22:49, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Akin to what I said on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Minor characters in Bloom County , maybe a move to List of Seafort Saga characters or something is in order?  - B RAINULATOR 9 ( TALK ) 19:36, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Brainulator9 Right now we have no sources suggesting that would pass NLIST/GNG either.  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 04:20, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  06:14, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Agree that this is not passing WP:SIGCOV .  Abhishek0831996 ( talk ) 18:00, 23 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
Iman Gadzhi : Forbes contributor pieces and other paid PR items, also a crypto "marketer".  Not meeting GNG.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:57, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Internet , Russia ,  and United Kingdom .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:57, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete crypto spam - David Gerard ( talk ) 19:36, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] crypto spam ??  There's only one line about crypto on this article....  CassiJevenn ( talk ) 18:00, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : BLP, fails GNG and BIO.  Sources in article are interviews and promotional.  BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV from IS RS addressing the subject directly and indepth.  WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"' ; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP ) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS , WP:RS , WP:SIGCOV ).  // Timothy :: talk Delete The sourcing is indeed dubious, and I can't find anything better.  Girth Summit (blether) 14:56, 1 May 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
Arcadia Global School : Though per WP:SCHOOLOUTCOME , schools are presumed notable, but here, I question its notability.  It's a pure case of WP:TOOSOON .  Welp, a redirect to the founder, Mohan G. Valrani may be good for WP:ATD .  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  07:36, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Schooloutcomes does not claim that schools are presumed notable.  It states that notability has to be proven conform Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N) and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) (WP:ORG).  The Banner talk 08:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United Arab Emirates .  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  07:40, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:56, 11 July 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
Max Pucher : It's uncertain if the head of Union Souveränität is the same person as the racecar driver.  Walt Yoder ( talk ) 04:45, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Austria .  Walt Yoder ( talk ) 04:45, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I have removed the BLP violating text in the article (most of it).  Perhaps surprisingly, Pucher has virtually zero coverage out there and this article is totally unsourced.  Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 08:52, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:26, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 05:36, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no SIGCOV.  ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 23:34, 11 April 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
IC 4000 : C messier ( talk ) 15:20, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:04, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : definitely not notable.  - Parejkoj ( talk ) 18:58, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , as notability cannot be shown.  hamster717 ( discuss anything!🐹✈️ * my contribs🌌 ) 21:01, 12 June 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
Ramachandran: A Retrospective : References listed may not be reliable, given they link to a Google Books listing and a web shop.  Sims2aholic8 ( talk ) 21:25, 3 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:47, 3 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:47, 3 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:47, 3 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:47, 3 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Merge or Redirect to A. Ramachandran .  The book does not seem notable enough for a separate article.  I searched online for reviews of the book in reliable sources but the mentions I found were in unreliable publications or blogs or book seller sites.  Does not meet GNG & NBOOK criteria.  If three solid book reviews in RS's are found I may change my ! vote, but for now merging or redirecting makes the most sense.  Not enough content to merge, and it is already on the A.Ramachandran article, so no need for a redirect either.  Netherzone ( talk ) 18:31, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom. – Owais Al Qarni ( talk ) 00:52, 4 January 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!  22:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  There is nothing to indicate this meets WP:GNG nor WP:NBOOK nor any other standard of notability.  Jacona ( talk ) 18:48, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Thoughts on merging?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, NotAGenious ( talk ) 18:55, 17 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
Syed Zafrul Hasan Rizvi : SL93 ( talk ) 00:40, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam and India .  SL93 ( talk ) 00:44, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions .  SL93 ( talk ) 00:48, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete from a cursory Google search, it seems like this is someone who might be (barely) notable if you're an islamic scholar who knows where to find the right sources to back everything up.  While I know WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP , this article is in such a dire state of unsourced, highly original disrepair (and has been for over a decade) that if I ripped out everything that isn't verifiable we're gonna be down to a single sentence with no indication of notability.  Regretfully, I propose WP:TNT .  BrigadierG ( talk ) 01:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Not any reliable sources on the page with significant coverage on the subject.  This is another one of those WP:SYNTH pages where an editor uses his own analysis or synthesis of materials that implies a conclusion not stated by the sources.  Fails WP:GNG .  RangersRus ( talk ) 11:55, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : As per my check, I found not a single reliable source with in-depth coverage that can establish notability for the subject.  The subject fails WP:GNG .  Grab Up - Talk 11:59, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Failed WP:GNG , nothing found about this person.  Youknowwhoistheman ( talk ) 16:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No significant coverage and fails GNG -- Robertjamal12 ~🔔 15:05, 29 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
Panchapandavar : The Doom Patrol ( talk ) 09:18, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  The Doom Patrol ( talk ) 09:18, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Unreleased film with lack of sources.  Though two sources are mentioned, they are not properly cited and are inaccessible for verification.  Kailash29792 (talk) 09:20, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Jayan#Filmography , where it is mentioned, Jayan being the top billing name of this completed film, as the intro clearly states. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 11:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There are no reliable sources, means non-notable production.  Beside, people searching for more notable 1999 film Panchapandavar will end up in Jayan's filmography.  Google search for Panchapandavar also shows results mostly of the 1999 film .  So, it would be a bad redirect, and also violates WP:PRIMARYFILM since it is not the primary film. -- The Doom Patrol ( talk ) 12:57, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Fair enough then Keep as a disambiguation page with at least the 2 films mentioned above, to help the reader.  - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 21:00, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails GNG and NFILM, no WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV found.  BEFORE showed some database and promo (not much), but nothing with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth from WP:IS WP:RS.  // Timothy :: talk 16:08, 2 November 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
Midtown (quartet) : All we have is Broadway World ( [13] ), which was assessed as an unreliable PR outlet in an RSN discussion ( February 2023 ), and the conferral of an award as reported by the organization conferring it [14] .  Searching online turned up more press releases for concerts, but nothing significant.  signed, Rosguill talk 15:53, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New York .  signed, Rosguill talk 15:53, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Source 5 is reliable, but that's about it.  There's also a Midtown Jazz quartet, different from this group, that pops up when searching.  I see nothing further about this group.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:57, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Source 5 also has almost nothing to say about Midtown, except But Quorum won all three rounds of competition and took first prize by a wide margin — a full 1.5 percentage points over second-place winner Midtown.  signed, Rosguill talk 15:59, 15 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
BBX Music : Not only is this article a clear WP:COI , but is a total WP:GNG failure as well.  λ Negative MP1 17:55, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies .  λ Negative MP1 17:55, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Turkey .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:36, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not one of the more important indie labels per WP:MUSIC ; has no notable artists.  Chubbles ( talk ) 06:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I am unable to find sufficient sources for this to meet WP:GNG let alone WP:NORG .  Every reference listed is primary and unreliable.  StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 23:09, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Apart from the apparent lack of notability, I am concerned about a potential WP:PROMO .  Aintabli ( talk ) 01:51, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Delete Fails WP:GNG . -- Kadı Message 18:07, 22 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
2024 World Aquatics Artistic Swimming World Cup : It has been moved to draft space twice, by User:Hey man im josh and User:Wikishovel , and moved back to article space twice by the originator with no apparent improvement.  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 22:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Sports ,  and France .  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 22:20, 3 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Anyone can add references and links.  You don't have to draft it for that.  In addition, you can see what it is all about.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hshezsvsbebe ( talk • contribs ) Yes, we do have to draftify articles that have no references.  Verifiability is a non-negotiable core policy.  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 02:19, 5 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I was going to suggest draftifying, as it's an international event sponsored by an international governing body, but I can't find any significant coverage of the event yet in RS, even though we're on the second day of a 3-day event.  A redirect to World Aquatics is another possibility.  Maybe if subsequent events get better coverage, this could be merged later into a single article World Aquatics Artistic Swimming World Cup .  This is the second year that this tournament was held, and according to the World Aquatics article, it replaces the World Series that was held 2017–2022 [1] .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 06:44, 4 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Lots of possibilities mentioned but we need opinions for specific outcomes they want to happen.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:14, 10 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!  22:12, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination, still not seeing significant coverage online in independent sources following the event.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 23:27, 17 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
Janimation : It may also have a COI with the articles major contributors, like Farix said.  JazzyRightdoer ( talk ) 07:56, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Comics and animation , Companies ,  and Texas .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:28, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:18, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Seems like a case of industry notability, but without some reliable sources it may not be possible to verify.  The existing magazine sources seem like industry periodicals that rely on interviews, so it's hard to verifiably determine the contribution to these major works.  A single source that's not an interview would really help.  — siro χ o 08:40, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:15, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I did a fair amount of digging when I initially proposed this page for deletion and could not find significant coverage in multiple sources-- the majority of citations mention Janimation's work on notable productions but do not convey notability to the business itself.  Additionally, the article creator was almost certainly a paid consultant (see my follow-up comment on the Talk page) and the previous deletion was reversed by JaniOctopus, whose user name is a direct reference to the company and who has not made any effort to improve the page since having the deletion reversed (all to say, I strongly suspect ongoing COI).  Vegantics ( talk ) 19:13, 3 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
Finvasia : On its face there appears to be valid sourcing, but I am finding only brief mentions, WP:NEWSORGINDIA press and churnalism, or otherwise unreliable sources.  Nothing that would meet WP:ORGCRIT .  I was initially going to suggest a merge into ZuluTrade but a cursory look was unable to find anything showing that page is notable either.  CNMall41 ( talk ) 06:26, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Cryptocurrency , Finance , Companies ,  and India .  CNMall41 ( talk ) 06:27, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note - Here is an example of the sourcing.  I removed and then added back so the discussion can run but you can see one is a press release and the other is a sponsored (or branded) post which was paid for.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 06:30, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Punjab-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:39, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Had started removing the obviously paid placements and advertorials before I noticed CNMall41 had restored them to illustrate the promotional editing here; my apologies.  The remaining material is brief mentions, PR, and some questionable sources.  I was not able to find anything else in a brief search other than more very obvious paid placement.  Sam Kuru (talk) 15:14, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete These paid articles are not reliable at all, these articles are maybe paid published to create or support this page.  Grabup ( talk ) 07:01, 15 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
CarSim : No indication if the sources have WP:SIGCOV , so seems to fail WP:GNG .  First two sources seem to have been written by the article's initial author.  UtherSRG (talk) 17:53, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology , Computing ,  and Transportation .  UtherSRG (talk) 17:53, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment -Sorry haven't done AfD for yonks, can't remember the etiquette.  Anyway, Carsim is used intensively in one small field, vehicle dynamics simulation.  It is not the market leader, but it has been around forever.  There's virtually no google coverage of it other than press releases so I suppose its notability is questionable.  Greglocock ( talk ) 05:09, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, that would mean that the field is too small to be of interest for a wide audience.  gidonb ( talk ) 16:22, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:30, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per comments above.  gidonb ( talk ) 16:22, 22 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