hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
List of members clubs in London: The information is in a slightly different format but I don't think there's much which is left to merge or would be lost with a redirect.  I'm nominating this page because it has an orphan hat whereas the other is arguably better linked and integrated.  However I think there's an argument to say that the candidate for deletion should be List of gentlemen's clubs in London on the basis that there are clubs in London of this type which, strictly speaking are not and never have been for gentlemen such as the University Women's Club - but that doesn't seem to currently matter as it appears in both pages!  JMWt ( talk ) 11:59, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United Kingdom .  JMWt ( talk ) 11:59, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete List of members clubs in London , move List of gentlemen's clubs in London to that title, and leave a redirect.  We don’t need to have 2 pages that describe the same thing with slightly different content and titles.  - 🔥 𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌) 🔥 12:07, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:15, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  This should have been a technical move.  I agree with the above that this article is deleted to make room for the move from List of gentlemen's clubs in London to List of members' clubs in London (correct grammar).  Ajf773 ( talk ) 21:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Agree with the above.  -- Bduke ( talk ) 05:44, 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
List of Puma sponsorships: In no way meets WP:NLIST .  Iskandar323 ( talk ) 21:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions .  Iskandar323 ( talk ) 21:27, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:36, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 23:20, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Why are we as a non-profit doing this tracking of shoe/athletic wear sponsorships in this much detail to begin with?  This isn't appropriately encyclopedic in the least and has major MOSFLAG issues (look at List of Nike sponsorships#Artists , which is so disconnected from so many policies that they're putting flag icons next to music artists).  Leave this to whatever sneaker wiki tracks this stuff, it certainly doesn't fit our purposes at all (and any move to category classification isn't appropriate at all there either).  Consider this an endorsement of any article in Category:Sports sponsorships to be taken to deletion.  Nate • ( chatter ) 23:45, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no RS covering this as a list, just press releases and the like addressing individual sponsorships, so fails NLIST.  AryKun ( talk ) 06:25, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:NOTDIRECTORY and WP:NOTADVERTISING .  This is an encyclopedia, not the Puma marketing department, there is nothing encyclopedic about this list.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 09:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Subject clearly violates WP:NOTPROMO and WP:NLIST .  Time to put this one to rest.  Let'srun ( talk ) 06:19, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:25, 22 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
Tam's Gold Seal Drugs: Pretzelles ( talk ) 19:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Indiana .  Pretzelles ( talk ) 19:12, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:18, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - failed GNG and it also does not exist anymore today.  Not much sources mention it.  WizardGamer775 ( talk ) 20:31, 29 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
Putsil Valley: Certainly does not meet GNG, and does not meet even the lenient standards of NGEO.  There's nothing in the sources or that I could find that even confirms that the "Putsil Valley" exists.   Two of the sources are advertisements for resorts and even they barely mention it.    The other ref is to support a water use fact and is just a book en masse "Human Rights, Tribal Movements and Violence" Per the SNG I'm very lenient on geo/place articles but there's not even an RS factoid that says that a place by that name exists.  North8000 ( talk ) 22:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography , India ,  and Odisha .  Shellwood ( talk ) 23:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Eh, it might.  A search for Putsil Odisha brought up a lot of ecotourism sites, but switching to Scholar I've found references to a folk song being from there, more information about the hydro power plant in several articles, and one reference in one unknown journal saying Bollywood movies were filmed there.  Also mentioned in [12] at least.  Poor article though.  SportingFlyer T · C 00:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Coverage in the New Indian Express [13] ...  All I find otherwise are photos or blogs.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:11, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Maybe move to Putsil and make the article about the village of Putsil (or just a new article).  I was interested in writing about the village, but it seems to actually be a pretty depressing/draining topic.  3df ( talk ) 05:07, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete/move to Putsil .  That appears to be a real place we don't have coverage of yet and what the sources are on, the valley is just a generic reference for around the Putsil Mountain.  Reywas92 Talk 14:43, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Fails WP:GNG .  There is no significant coverage even though we can tell such a place exists but there is not enough data in the references to have this place have an article of its own.  RangersRus ( talk ) 17:39, 14 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
Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corporation: — TheresNoTime ( talk • they/them) 12:39, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - non notable, no secondary sources XenonNSMB ( talk , contribs ) 12:51, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - borderline spam created by someone who got blocked for spamming at later time.  May not meet NCORP, and as another justification, the article is so fluffy that start all over is also reasonable.  Graywalls ( talk ) 21:11, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism , Organizations , United States of America ,  and Washington, D.C. .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:41, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I did my best to find independent sources.  There are some sources confirming that the organisation exists and has been involved in at least one legal case, but that's weak for establishing notability.  Following what Graywalls said, the article was created by a user who is indefinitely blocked since 3 March 2022 for advertising spam, and in six years since the article's creation on 5 May 2017 nothing much has improved in terms of sourcing.  Boud ( talk ) 00:29, 12 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
Rocket Streaming Audio Server: No coverage in reliable sources that I can see, and most of the citations go to the official website.  NinjaRobotPirate ( talk ) 19:56, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions .  NinjaRobotPirate ( talk ) 19:56, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Why this specific article, and why now?  Should we also consider proposing Icecast and SHOUTcast for deletion as part of this cleanup, as they also have the same notability issues?  GameGod ( talk ) 20:16, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You're welcome to nominate those pages if you believe they have notability issues.  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 20:24, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] FWIW Shoutcast does seem to have better sourcing than this one.  BuySomeApples ( talk ) 21:45, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Why not this article, if it has poor sourcing, we can't keep it.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:36, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per nom.  Not finding independent reliable sources that discuss the software, nor does there appear to be anything particularly notable about the software.  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 20:22, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I didn't see much of anything in the way of sources after a Google search.  If this were a niche topic maybe there would be print sources, but I would expect a streaming service to be mentioned in online publications if it was mentioned anywhere.  BuySomeApples ( talk ) 21:42, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no RS found.  Also note that article submitted the day after that software released its 1.0.0 version, suggesting a bit of WP:RECENT — siro χ o 23:59, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per others.  DarkHorseMayhem ( talk ) 00:20, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails notability guidelines.  Maliner ( talk ) 14:24, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  per nom and @ Siroxo .  Can't find RS either.  🌶️ Jala peño 🌶️ Don't click this link !  16:38, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Hardly any mentions of this software, most hits are on SpaceX and rockets.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:35, 26 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
Kins Ferna's: Rejected at AFC, moved to main space by creator, bringing here for community to decide.  Theroadislong ( talk ) 09:23, 6 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:39, 6 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Hello to all editors and wikipedia administrators, I moved the artist's page to the main page and now the page has been sent for deletion.  I would like to contribute to this page with some editors who have available Edmilsonreis2321 ( talk ) 09:39, 6 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:39, 6 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] No administrator or editor has responded to me regarding this article to date.  Edmilsonreis2321 ( talk ) 06:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I contributed this article, I think an article in the encyclopedia is more likely to be improved every day than an article in draft.  So I came to appeal to all Wikipedia administrators and editors and other members of Wikipedia to come and contribute and debate about this article.  Edmilsonreis2321 ( talk ) 06:24, 8 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, RL0919 ( talk ) 13:15, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No RS sourcing used now in the article, I can't find any sourcing about this individual.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : There is no Portuguese article to translate from, the Afrikanns article uses wikis or blogs for sourcing, so still nothing we can use.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 17:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No RS available, and I can't find anything significant online.  Cited sources are mostly dead links, and the ones that aren't do not seem to be reliable.  StartGrammarTime ( talk ) 02:04, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment :I've seen an article here on Wikipedia without any source cited, but okay, I understand, we're going to send the article for deletion since it's not qualified for an encyclopedia.  Edmilsonreis2321 ( talk ) 12:51, 16 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
Sipu River: Google tells me https://guj-nwrws.gujarat.gov.in/showpage.aspx? contentid=1845&lang=english should be a source, however that appears to be statistics and a dead link.  Sohom ( talk ) 20:25, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography , Gujarat ,  and Rajasthan .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:20, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  Sohom ( talk ) 07:31, 1 April 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!  23:24, 7 April 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!  23:06, 13 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
Belleville, North Dakota: Mangoe ( talk ) 03:22, 8 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: North Dakota and Geography .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 06:26, 8 September 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!  03:35, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No information found, nothing to suggest notability.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 21:38, 16 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
Mau–Lokmanya Tilak Terminus Express: microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 01:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation , India , Maharashtra ,  and Uttar Pradesh .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:29, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : looks like this is a new train route that started last month, and I found some coverage chronicling its launch.  Left guide ( talk ) 11:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Just because the launch was notable ( WP:1E ), I don’t see any WP:SUSTAINED coverage.  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 18:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Agree with @ MicrobiologyMarcus , seems to fail WP:GNG, page has no sources as well.  Noorullah ( talk ) 01:55, 5 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 00:45, 5 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 03:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to whichever of the two train station that is more notable.  Jothefiredragon ( talk ) 04:22, 12 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
Location-based authentication: It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, and unreferenced for longer, so hopefully we can get this resolved.  Boleyn ( talk ) 13:23, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] comment It gets lots of Gbook hits but the article is so bad that it could just as well be TNTed.  Mangoe ( talk ) 13:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Software .  Owen× ☎ 14:02, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - This article is a bizarre word salad.  Llajwa ( talk ) 21:44, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and tag for issues if needed.   It's a valid concept in the context of multi-factor authentication, and there is plenty written about it, but the article in its state is in pretty bad shape, and I wouldn't object to a redirect back to Multi-factor authentication#Location without any restrictions against recreating it at a future point.  I'm not sure how much of the current article can be salvaged.   But really, the whole point of a wiki is so someone that comes along in the future could take a look at something like this and say, "I could do better than that" and make those changes themselves.  RecycledPixels ( talk ) 19:56, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - per RecycledPixels, this is a valid concept in MFA.  Not opposed to a redirect as well.  Sohom ( talk ) 08:39, 4 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
HCA Florida Highlands Hospital: Every hospital has a history, and every hospital has services and ratings.  I fail to see how this one hospital meets WP:GNG .   — Paper Luigi T • C 07:08, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:28, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Health and fitness-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:28, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:29, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:30, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no significant coverage that isn't WP:ROTM , or specifically about the hospital, from a reliable source for WP:GNG .  And so also fails WP:SIRS to overcome WP:ORGSIG Shaws username ( talk ) 15:20, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete this article should have never been created to begin with.  Catfurball ( talk ) 19:17, 13 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
Rahul Varun: So I think now the editors should be allowed to decide.  Thanks you.  Youknowwhoistheman ( talk ) 07:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Journalism , News media ,  and Bihar .  Youknowwhoistheman ( talk ) 07:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: the deletion discussion about this page is already discussed and closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rahul Varun Wikisfrog ( talk ) 07:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It was closed because the nominator was blocked, not on the merits of the page. — Moriwen ( talk ) 16:58, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:36, 5 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Already at AFD so not eligible for a Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:33, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 11:15, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Sources 8 and 14 are the only ones listed as reliable per Source Highlighter.  8 seems rather promo, telling people how to succeed.  14 is fine, but the rest doesn't add up to notability, only confirming what they've done as a career.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:40, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : does not satisfy WP:NACTOR and the sources are weak.  Perfectstrangerz ( talk ) 01:45, 22 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