hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Piwik PRO Analytics Suite: Similar appears to be have been deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piwik PRO , Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Piwik PRO (2nd nomination) .  Disregarding that, none of the sources are sufficient to pass NCORP, many are press releases or primary sources related to the company.  There's a bunch of statistic sites (e.g. [17] ), which in counts as trivial coverage under "inclusion in collections that have indiscriminate inclusion criteria".  Other trivial coverage under ncorp includes raising capital ( [18] ).  Many supposed third-party sources are written or possibly written by the company and thus primary ( [19] is written by their PR manager, [20] is written by a "guest writer", and covers a merger which is also trivial coverage).  BEFORE search only turns up more of the same.  Pahunkat ( talk ) 10:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions .  Pahunkat ( talk ) 10:23, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising , Internet , Software ,  and Poland .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  As per my previous assessment of this aricle before my BLAR, I substantially agree with the assessment of potential sources.  All I have to add is that I reiterate my recomendation to the article creator that any such future edits go through the appropriate processes ( Wikipedia:Articles for creation , Wikipedia:Edit requests ).  The community's patience is not infinite, and while I do not pretend to be a barometer in this specific regard, moving through the proper channels may reduce the pace at which such patience wears.  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 11:58, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:51, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Sources fail WP:ORGCRIT , and BEFORE search turns up nothing else.  Should this discussion result in deletion, I recommend WP:SALTing "Piwik Pro" and permutations of it given persistent efforts to reject community consensus and evade appropriate channels like AfC for paid edits.  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 14:41, 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
Kadiyan: Sources are just passing mentions.  Nothing significant.  Maliner ( talk ) 07:43, 6 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups , History ,  and Haryana .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 16:29, 6 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Text and tags say that it was intended as a List page of people with the surname of Kadiyan, but the only item is a village.  Since only a handful of articles exist about someone with this surname, and since there is no WP:SIGCOV of the surname discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources , it fails WP:NLIST .  If it is not intended as a list, it fails all criteria under WP:GNG .  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 13:53, 7 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Originally closed this as a Soft Deletion but the page has previously been deleted as a PROD so Soft Deletion is not an option.  So, I'm relisting this discussion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:13, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete seems fine, although maybe someone can repurpose those references elsewhere.  It seems unusually well sourced for a 1-line stub.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 03:13, 20 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
Hetty Shi: Placements at novice & junior competitions do not count.  Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:40, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Canada .  Bgsu98 (Talk) 10:40, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 10:46, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:41, 14 January 2024 (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 11:26, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 2024 Canadian Figure Skating Championships#Senior results .  WP:TOOSOON , but a bronze medal is something.  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 11:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : probably TOOSOON.  Coverage is all simple match results or local media coverage [24] of a "hometown hero", which is fine, but we need more than that.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:01, 28 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
Vugar Aliyev Amir: Only criterion subject could possibly pass is prestigious national awards, but I haven't been able to find much information on the prizes even in their native languages, and hence doubt it counts as prestigious.  The sources in the article currently are both primary.  Fermiboson ( talk ) 02:04, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Academics and educators ,  and Azerbaijan .  Fermiboson ( talk ) 02:04, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  With no context to the awards we cannot assume their significance.  The first reference, labeled "Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences", is neither an independent source nor the kind of academy membership that would pass WP:PROF#C3 : it is an employee profile of someone who works as a researcher for the ANAS.  It mentions some of the same awards, but again without context.  It also mentions foreign membership in the Russian Academy of Natural Sciences , which I thought might be promising until I read the linked article; importantly, this is not to be confused with the actually-prestigious Russian Academy of Sciences .  Anyway, none of this is evidence for non-notability but neither is it evidence of notability and without evidence we cannot have an article.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 08:47, 23 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
Moussa Ndikumana: No indication of notability.  Unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 00:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 00:59, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:40, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:57, 17 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
Elvish Yadav: All the news references are about the show Bigg Boss show where he is now a contestant and about the controvercy on the show.  Nomadwikiholic ( talk ) 17:58, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  Nomadwikiholic ( talk ) 17:58, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Internet ,  and India .  Karnataka ( talk ) 18:00, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Haryana-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:44, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep This notable article proves –– 𝚅𝚁𝙹 𝙱𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚑𝚞 05:41, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] All the news reference are written by news desk, there no journalist name.  So those news are not independent.  And the news reference which is written by journalist that news agency is not reliable.  Hence not falling under GNG.  Nomadwikiholic ( talk ) 06:52, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] When did you check that the news is not independent?  See the article once again, I have also corrected it.  –– 𝚅𝚁𝙹 𝙱𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚑𝚞 07:25, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Filmibeat is not reliable source, Statesmen is reliable but not written by journalist, India Today is reliable source but not written by journalist, Rediff is good but not in-depth coverage, The Print is not reliable source, Republic World is not reliable source.  I'd like to refer you WP:ICTFSOURCES to know which is reliable and which is not.  Also I would like to refer you to read WP:GNG and recheck those references again.  Thanks Nomadwikiholic ( talk ) 08:23, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] When you have already started the discussion, now only experienced editors will take this discussion.  –– 𝚅𝚁𝙹 𝙱𝚊𝚗𝚍𝚑𝚞 09:23, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy delete : definitely case of WP:TOOSOON , no WP:GNG , No WP:RS QueerEcofeminist🌈 03:30, 1 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per nom.  Ajeeb Prani ( talk ) 12:09, 3 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
Progress Chapter Two: The March Of Progress: WP:BEFORE didn't show this event was particularly notable.  Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs ) 20:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions .  Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs ) 20:53, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Hello, thank you for the sincere feedback.  However, I believe that a proper categorization and documentation of Progress Wrestling's "Chapter" flagship events should exist.  Now I understand that the early chapters might indeed be less notable than the more recent ones but I believe they should be part of the project which has to benefit from clear continuity.  The presence of only some of the chapters on the mainspace would disrupt it as this continuity should be sanctioned as a book with pages.  Let me know what you think.  Regards!  JeyReydar97 ( talk ) 21:40, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] We don't have articles on subjects that aren't notable simply because later similar articles might be notable.  Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs ) 21:48, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Almost all of these events are also featured on WWE Network's broadcast system as VOD shoes as Progress has held business relationships with WWE.  They're pretty popular on that streaming service.  JeyReydar97 ( talk ) 22:07, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No coverage in RS, nothing found now.  Was a decade ago, likely no further coverage.  I don't see any sourcing we can use.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 22:29, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It has video coverage on Progress' Youtube channel.  I also found written coverages from two trustworthy sites.  One of them is 411Mania.  They should be more than enough as references.  JeyReydar97 ( talk ) 22:42, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:07, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: Perhaps @ JeyReydar97 : could combine a couple of these early events into a larger article?  Mixed martial arts does something similar for articles such as 2020 in Konfrontacja Sztuk Walki .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 03:15, 28 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!  20:58, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment maybe, a list like List of Evolve Wrestling events is more usefull.  -- HHH Pedrigree ( talk ) 08:40, 5 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ HHH Pedrigree : Thank you; I wasn't sure wether they had done it for wrestling events too.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 17:31, 5 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:49, 11 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
List of AFL Championship Game broadcasters: Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to the most ardent NFL fans.  Fails WP:LISTN .  Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE .  As with sources per WP:RS besides those unsourced, consists entirely of forums, if not dead; not helping this list to assert notability.  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 17:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , American football , Lists ,  and United States of America .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 17:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per failing WP:LISTN as a WP:LISTCRUFT that would only be used for trivia purposes.  Conyo14 ( talk ) 17:42, 16 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
Vegetable Market Workers Union: The article can be redirected.  Grab Up - Talk 02:38, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Andhra Pradesh .  Grab Up - Talk 02:38, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment The editor who de-PROD'd this article suggested a redirect to All India Trade Union Congress .  Is there a reason you came to AFD instead?  L iz Read!  Talk!  04:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Liz , I thought this should be discussed at Afd before redirecting it there.  I have no reason other than that; I myself don’t want to redirect it.  I also thought, if someone disagrees with me after the redirect, then what am I going to do?  So, I don’t want to bear any burden.  Grab Up - Talk 04:27, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The redirect is also questionable because I too could not find any source that can prove the existence or even an affiliation with All India Trade Union Congress .  RangersRus ( talk ) 14:04, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 08:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I can't verify that this exists at all, or if it has continued to exist for the 19 years since the article was created (almost in its current form), or if is affiliated with the All India Trade Union Congress , or who "Moulana" is.   Neither Google nor Bing can find anything.   Without a source, this should be deleted without a redirect.  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 01:14, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I did some search and could come up with nothing reliable that could verify if this page could be warranted.  No sources on the page.  Fails WP:GNG .  RangersRus ( talk ) 14:01, 25 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
Maryann Krieglstein: Likely WP:VANITY page.  jps ( talk ) 18:00, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Social science .  jps ( talk ) 18:00, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Illinois .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 18:01, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions .  TJMSmith ( talk ) 19:47, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not voting since this is my mother.  I've had my COI announced on the top of my user page for over a decade.  I haven't edited this page since 2016 and have no plans of violating COI and editing ever again.  This article went through peer review at Articles for Creation, as noted on the talk page.  I did not move it to the main space.  Finally, are Maryann's google scholar results .  Her seminal research has been cited 60 times.  Her co-authorship has been cited 128.  D kriegls ( talk to me! ) 21:34, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete or draftify .  Sadly, I don't think WP:PROF or WP:GNG is met.  Awards and recognition are very local.  Perhaps, if no better sources are found (my BEFORE did not help), we can draftify it rather than delete it.  Sources may appear, eventually, and restoring a userpace draft is easier than going through a REFUND.  And I presume User:Dkriegls would not mind hosting this article in their userspace for indefinite time?  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 02:22, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've spent a good amount of time on Wikipedia trying to save/add biographies of female scientists and artists .  Happy to add my mom to the list ( link ).  I'd be grateful if you could provide some guidance on what you think would improve the article.  D kriegls ( talk to me! ) 20:39, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete but her presence might be maintained on WP if one could use her written materials in articles such as Violence against women .  That would be more likely to lead people to her work than an article under her name, IMO.  Lamona ( talk ) 09:41, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Seems to be part of a WALL of the creator's parents (see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Werner Krieglstein and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transcendental perspectivism ).  Unfortunately, the scholarly work of this person (a few journal articles with a grand total citation count of around 130) and the academic awards (mostly internal from her community college) fall very far short of typical PROF criteria.  128.252.154.2 ( talk ) 00:06, 1 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
Central African Republic–Ukraine relations: Fails GNG.  LibStar ( talk ) 22:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Africa ,  and Ukraine .  LibStar ( talk ) 22:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not seeing or finding any evidence of WP:SIGCOV of this topic.  Yilloslime ( talk ) 18:58, 16 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
Yovan Nagwetch: The strongest notability claim here is a nomination for a specialty music award, which would be fine to mention if the article were properly sourced but is not top-level enough to constitute an automatic pass of NMUSIC #8 on bad sourcing -- but the article is referenced entirely to primary sources that are not support for notability, with not even one reliable or GNG-building source shown at all.  There was, additionally, a completely unreferenced article about his band, which basically made no other notability claims at all besides this guy being in it, so I've redirected that to the BLP as well -- and I would also note that there isn't a single inbound link to this article from any other Wikipedia article: the redirects from the band and one of his album titles are the only inbound links leading to this, and until I unlinked them as recursive redirects just now this article was the only inbound link leading to the band or the album title either, so these three titles are essentially creating a self-contained walled garden.  Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him or his band from having to have much better sourcing than this.  Bearcat ( talk ) 14:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada .  Bearcat ( talk ) 14:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The sources provided are not strong enough to establish notablility.  @T.C.G. [talk] 22:49, 10 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
Mavila Vishwanathan Nair: Very little in gnews and supplied sources do not meet WP:SIGCOV except one by Union Bank but that's a primary source.  2 of the sources are dead links.  LibStar ( talk ) 01:54, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India .  Shellwood ( talk ) 10:08, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Fails WP:GNG and WP:ANYBIO .  Twinkle1990 ( talk ) 13:01, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Karnataka and Kerala .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:31, 11 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