hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Lumberton High School (Texas): WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:29, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:01, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Available sourcing sufficient to meet WP:GNG , as with pretty much any other secondary school in the western world.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 11:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment notability is determined not by the references in the article, which at the time of nomination were as noted, not so good, but by whether such references exist .  There are, loads of references available in an easy internet search.  First , just using Google, I found a bunch, and added a few to the article.  I apologize for putting out some bare references, but due to situations beyond my control, I don't have much time right now.  Secondly , I took a look at newspapers.com via the Wikipedia library and confirmed that historically, there are many, many more references over a WP:SUSTAINED period of time.  A good bit of the coverage is from national sources, try searching for "Lumberton High School" + Burqa for one such instance.  IMO, a robust WP:BEFORE would have yielded the conclusion that 1.) the article was poorly sourced, but sources clearly NEXIST and so the article should be improved, not torched.  Jacona ( talk ) 19:51, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  There is WP:SUSTAINED and significant coverage in many reliable sources .  The article meets WP:NSCHOOL .  The article is poorly sourced and needs improvement, but the subject is notable and should be edited for content and utilize some of the sources available, rather than being deleted.  The sources currently in the article are more than sufficient to demonstrate that the school meets NSCHOOL, but much polishing is needed.  Jacona ( talk ) 19:56, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Per Jacona although with the caveat that those sources are news sources and thus primary.  Still, the school received national news attention, and sustained coverage.  It is a large school, open  since the 1960s and is shown to have actively particiapted in and won state championships.  That looks notable to me. I fixed some of the bare url refs but none of the  12newsnow.com urls work for me.  Could you check those?  If they work for US readers it may be a site that only allows regional access to its content, in which case I would say it is not suitable for verification purposes.  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 20:20, 16 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: keep
Phoseon Technology: I looked on Google and the listed sources are just blogs and trade press.  Therefore, this medium-sized manufacturing organization fails Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) BigheadBigheadBighead ( talk ) 18:36, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Technology ,  and Oregon .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - as initial author, and I just updated it for the first time in a decade, there is substantial coverage in independent sources.  None are the local paper (this company is in Hillsboro and the then local paper was the Hillsboro Argus).  The PBJ and Oregonian are regional papers, and there are journals and other publications covering the company or its technologies.  This is not a company on the scale of Apple, but we don't require that.  May need some clean up from what appears to be COI edits over the last decade though.  Aboutmovies ( talk ) 21:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – Good coverage from editorial staff from editions of the American City Business Journals .  TLA (talk) 04:59, 14 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: keep
Muhabbet: Not notable.  A BLP with no references at all.  The external links are a self published web page and IMDb which is user generated.  Does not meet WP:GNG .  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 06:37, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Germany ,  and Turkey .  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 06:37, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  He meets WP:NSINGER #2 several times over, having had songs chart in three countries.  Here's [26] an article about him in a magazine run by Deutsche Welle and another [27] in the same magazine.  There's an article in Der Spiegel [28] .  Additional sources, including links to the charts justifying the WP:Singer pass are available on German Wikipedia.  Jahaza ( talk ) 08:15, 13 August 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!  05:58, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:SINGER#C2 with no shortage of verifiability as Jahaza has shown above.  And thanks to Jahaza for first steps in improving article.  — siro χ o 10:24, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as per the significant coverage in German reliable sources identified in this discussion and the fact that he has charting singles in three countries so passes WP:NMUSIC criteria 2, imv Atlantic306 ( talk ) 23:07, 24 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: keep
King of Fighters R-1: Chidgk1 ( talk ) 16:28, 8 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  Chidgk1 ( talk ) 16:28, 8 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - As a Japan-only release, there may be some Japanese reviews/sources, though they may be hard to find online now.  I will note that on the Japanese Wikipedia, this game actually does not have its own article, and it is just covered as part of the article on the KoF franchise.  If no sources can be found, this should at least be redirected to List of The King of Fighters video games rather than deleted.  Rorshacma ( talk ) 19:54, 8 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The game has reviews from Pocket Magazine and Video Games magazine, and some other reviews that may not be reliable.  However, it also got a blurb in Retro Gamer and a full review in Fun Generation .  Per WP:NEXIST it appears fully notable, sources currently in the article are irrelevant.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 00:03, 9 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .   The sources identified by ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ look to be enough to me.  Eluchil404 ( talk ) 17:29, 15 October 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!  21:18, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per sources given above.  I'm not entirely convinced of their reliability, but it seems reasonable to think that offline/non-English sources do exist.  ARandomName123 ( talk ) Ping me!  23:03, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] striking out weak, multiple refideas present on talk page.  ARandomName123 ( talk ) Ping me!  23:15, 22 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: keep
Marie Boulton: Fails WP:NPOL .  Uhooep ( talk ) 23:36, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Women ,  and Scotland .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:05, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – she seems to meet WP:GNG .  This Press & Journal article or this BBC article is certainly good enough (they cover the same event).  This Press & Journal article should also qualify, and there's other similar articles in both BBC and Press & Journal which go into some detail about her.  The best I can find outside those two newspapers is this from Aberdeen Live , which I think does contribute some, but the BBC coverage was already enough to push me over the edge.  Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:33, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : She may fail WP:NPOL , but she passes WP:GNG , as proven by Skarmory.  FatCat96 ( talk ) 03:46, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : meets WP:GNG --- Tumbuka Arch ★ ★ ★ 15:11, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : meets WP:GNG per existing references.  Upper Deck Guy ( talk ) 18:32, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : though material from at least that BBC article really ought to be added ( yes, I know... ).  UndercoverClassicist T · C 10:00, 23 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: keep
Lucy Shtein: Significance according to WP:POLITICS is not observed. -- Анатолий Росдашин ( talk ) 20:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Women , Politics ,  and Russia .  Shellwood ( talk ) 17:30, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The article in the Economist (cited on the article) is extended coverage of Shtein.  I also find mentions of her in the New York Times, the Guardian, and the Washington Post.  DaffodilOcean ( talk ) 21:56, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Agree with DaffodilOcean.  Clearly establishes WP:GNG MaskedSinger ( talk ) 04:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Extended significant coverage in multiple reliable independent sources already cited in the article at the time of commenting—the Economist, the Guardian, the New York Times—demonstrate fulfillment of the general notability guideline .  WP:NPOL is a guide for when a person is presumed to be notable, but people can still be notable if they meet the general notability guideline .  Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits ) 08:16, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , subject has been shown to be notable, she has received significant coverage in independent sources.  - Samoht27 ( talk ) 17:45, 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: keep
Kilasu Ostermeyer: Fails NBAD too.  Timothytyy ( talk ) 12:44, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Badminton , Thailand ,  and Germany .  Timothytyy ( talk ) 12:44, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 12:59, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - this LN piece might be enough to add a sentence or two to the article but isn't a GNG pass on its own.  If more sources can be found, then we could build something here.  If not, then I'd agree with the nominator and we need to delete this.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep two time medalist at the European Mixed Team Championships, the highest level tournament in Badminton Europe Confederation.  Also, a medalist in European Women's team championship, a continental equivalent of Uber Cup.  zoglophie 15:21, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Zoglophie Notability is based on coverage, not by achievements.  It does not even pass NBAD.  No coverage at all online.  An article which fails GNG, SNG and SIGCOV at the same time should definitely be deleted.  Timothytyy ( talk ) 00:22, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Her achievements are not low.  Her article should be kept based on her achievements alone.  And mind you, WP:NBAD doesn't include World Championship, Sudirman Cup, Continental Championship etc. but it does not make them a non notable tournament at any bounds.  It's laughable when someone is saying that.  Winning medals in those tournaments alone should be more than enough.  zoglophie 04:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Notability is not based on achievements , it is based on coverage .  I am not saying the subject is a weak player, I am saying it is not notable because it just doesn't pass GNG.  If you don't understand the guideline you can read WP:GNG , WP:BASIC and WP:BIO so that you can understand what notability is.  Timothytyy ( talk ) 11:06, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep 1 , 2 .  Stvbastian ( talk ) 11:53, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you so much for doing research, after considering the two sources provided by you and the sources provided by Spiderone, I decide that I will withdraw this AFD after you add the sources on the page.  Timothytyy ( talk ) 13:14, 19 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: keep
Gaston Gelos: Dejaqo ( talk ) 20:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Academics and educators , Businesspeople , Germany , Economics and Uruguay .  Dejaqo ( talk ) 20:56, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: Following a review of the article and its sources, I made some changes.  With sources like [1] , [2] an other citations in  that, notability can be clearly demonstrated.  Also he is frequently quoted by major financial media outlets including Bloomberg, CNBC, and the Financial Times, as an economist.  Southati ( talk ) 14:33, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Looking on GS under both RG Gelos  and Gaston Gelos seems sufficiently well cited for a pass of WP:Prof.  ( Msrasnw ( talk ) 17:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC) ) [ reply ] Keep In addition to  WP:Prof, clearly passes WP:GNG.  Gedaali ( talk ) 20:17, 19 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: keep
Comedian Marcus: 1 out of 5 on a source review.  Cumulatively, these don't meet WP:SIGCOV or WP:SUSTAINED withdrawn microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 17:50, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , India ,  and Goa .  Owen× ☎ 18:34, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Tiatr#Past_tiatrists with the one extensive source about his work that the nominator has Identified ( The Navhind Times ).  He is listed there and the target article lacks sources.  (Note: I am not familiar with this type of theater, so if he is found notable after all, feel free to discard my comment).  - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 01:34, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] --> keep .  WP:HEY and arguments and sources presented by The Discoverer below.  Thanks. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 22:07, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Not a shred of Notability.  Maliner ( talk ) 15:42, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect as per User:Mushy Yank (adding Marcus's name to the list of past tiatrists).  This page is obviously a labor of love for User:Rejoy2003 .  Comedian Marcus was clearly an accomplished person and I would love to have seen him perform.  I hope you will find other spaces to memorialize him and his achievements.  Llajwa ( talk ) 20:51, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Per User:The Discoverer below, I withdraw my redirect and switch to Keep .  Llajwa ( talk ) 17:26, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The article has many more references now in comparison to the time when it was nominated.  Admittedly, several of these references have only passing mentions of the subject, but this is a complete article in a mainstream newspaper focussed on the subject.  These four: [5] , [6] , [7] , [8] , are records of recognition accorded to him, while another newspaper article praises his performance in a play.  I think that these are sufficient to establish the notability for an artist who performs in a language that has very little presence in the online and offline publishing world.  The Discoverer ( talk ) 16:04, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , withdrawn above, the article has received significant improvement.  I'm bookmarking this to point to in the future in case people are curious as to the good that can come from AfD! microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 14:38, 29 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: keep
Lars Moe: Not enough academic achievements, since he is not in any list with highly cited researchers or with any highly impact publication.  Chiserc ( talk ) 07:56, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Norway .  Chiserc ( talk ) 07:56, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment There seems to be coverage in Norwegian media.  This [45] appears to be in a RS.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:37, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, there is some coverage.  I have found some sources based on WP:BEFORE : Vettimes , E24 , and the one source you mentioned.  However, I don't think this coverage is enough for notability.  Chiserc ( talk ) 14:55, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep in the strength of https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lars-Moe/publication/11571627_Population-based_incidence_of_mammary_tumours_in_some_dog_breeds/links/62383edabe72d414dad174ca/Population-based-incidence-of-mammary-tumours-in-some-dog-breeds.pdf (Google Scholar says cited by 278) and his other work (in some cases, he is not the primary author) and as a university president (which I think rector is a synonym for).  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 23:38, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There are academic publications that had some impact, I agree with that, but there should be always a caution with Google Scholar , as mentioned in the citation metrics .  I have seen his Scopus profile Lars Moe and his h-index is 22.  I don't have access on his Web of Science profile to double-check it, but I don't think his impact is quite convincing to establish WP:PROF .  Chiserc ( talk ) 10:46, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep based on the comments above, regarding his impact factor.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 18:56, 13 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: keep
Ma Famille: BlakeIsHereStudios ( talk | contributions ) 17:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Ivory Coast .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:07, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep : While the article is insufficient currently, there is definitely notability, with several reliable sources in French: Le Monde , Le Point , analysis article on JSTOR , TV5Monde , rfi , La Libre Afrique , Jeune Afrique ... and others which are perhaps less reliable / reputable Africine , IvoireBusiness , L'Infodrome , Pulse.ci , LeFaso , MediaCongo , AllAfrica .  As someone with limited knowledge of African TV, I'm sure there are other, better sources, but this is really just from the first few pages of Google Search results.  Shazback ( talk ) 19:07, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as per Shazback above.  Orange sticker ( talk ) 14:12, 1 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep thanks to Shazback's sources.  The JSTOR result seems especially strong.  Toughpigs ( talk ) 15:52, 1 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: keep
Russ Laribee: He once held the record for most times striking out in a game (since broken by Khalil Lee ), but the game in question has its own page at Longest professional baseball game and Laribee's record can be covered there.  O.N.R. (talk) 17:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Baseball .  O.N.R. (talk) 17:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Connecticut , Massachusetts ,  and Rhode Island .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:31, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I am finding coverage to meet GNG, for example [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] , besides coverage of his record setting game, where he got a lot of coverage, such as in this book .   Just because his record was broken is not reason to delete (in fact, if we cover his record in the game article we should at least retain a redirect from here).  Rlendog ( talk ) 15:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk ) 17:49, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: The sources provided by Rlendog all meet the WP:GNG , along with [ [21] ].  Let'srun ( talk ) 20:22, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: Reliable sources and a book demonstrate sufficient coverage to meet the General Notability Guideline (GNG).  Additionally, the player's record-setting game received notable attention, as evident in the coverage.  The fact that his record was later broken does not diminish the historical significance of his achievement, and retaining information about him in a dedicated article is justified.  Therefore, deletion is unwarranted, and the article should be kept based on the established notability criteria. " KarKuZoNga ( talk ) 05:20, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I am almost sure that this is an AI-generated summary of the comments above.  See this user's other AfD contributions and all of them are just summaries of other's comments written in a very AI style.  GraziePrego ( talk ) 05:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Summarizing comment doesn't make it ai.  Not sure about your point.  If you have issue with my Keep vote and its justification please give proper argument to oppose that.  KarKuZoNga ( talk ) 10:45, 25 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: keep