hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
John Davis Jr. (presidential candidate): Received less than 4000 votes out of nearly 20 million cast.  Lacking significant, in-depth coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources per WP:GNG .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 15:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Conservatism , Politics ,  and United States of America .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 15:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete None of the content or sources is substantively biographical.  Just some dude who took advantage of easy ballot access.  Reywas92 Talk 16:34, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect Redirect to 2012 Republican Party presidential candidates#Appeared on only two primary ballots .  Geotubemedia ( talk ) 10:02, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Colorado .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:36, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Clearly fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL .  I think a redirect would give an undue indication of notability.  Best, GPL93 ( talk ) 12:34, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 2012 Republican Party presidential candidates#Appeared on only two primary ballots as a viable ATD .  Per nom.  and others, fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL .  Sal2100 ( talk ) 16:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  (No prejudice against the recreation of a redirect from the redlink if desired, but delete first as I see no value in holding onto the edit history behind a redirect.)  Fringe candidates for president are not "inherently" notable per WP:NPOL just for existing, and have to show some evidence of actually passing WP:GNG on their sourceability — but this is referenced entirely to primary and unreliable sources that aren't support for notability, with no GNG-worthy sourcing shown whatsoever.  Bearcat ( talk ) 18:21, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or Redirect to 2012 Republican Party presidential candidates#Appeared on only two primary ballots , he's a minor candidate known only for being a minor candidate .  Samoht27 ( talk ) 19:14, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 2012 Republican Party presidential candidates#Appeared on only two primary ballots .  GobsPint ( talk ) 22:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 2012 Republican Party presidential candidates#Appeared on only two primary ballots : Good ATD as it's a valid search term.  Regarding GPL93's point, redirects do not imply that an article ought to exist or that the subject is notable.  Otherwise, we wouldn't have Rcats like {{ R from child }} .  In response to Bearcat's point, the preferred ATD is redirect, not delete, red link, and then create a redirect anew.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 02:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
Hockin station: – dlthewave ☎ 04:09, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Transportation .  – dlthewave ☎ 04:09, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 04:43, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect .  Some VIA Rail stops are notable so all of them should be blue links, with those that aren't individually notable being redirects to a list or some other appropriate target.  Thryduulf ( talk ) 08:36, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Winnipeg–Churchill train : each train station is not individually notable, although the whole train line is.  Several other stations on this line have already been WP:BLARed to that article.  InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs ) 10:27, 21 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: redirect
David Jones (writer): Sources aren’t being found to expand this… so why does it need to continue to exist?  Courcelles ( talk ) 21:10, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United Kingdom .  Shellwood ( talk ) 21:16, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] For sure Delete .  It obviously doesn't meet the notability guidelines for a living person and as stated in the original AfD, not enough sources are being found.  e ( talk ) 21:18, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Fireman Sam - as Jones's most known significant work CiphriusKane ( talk ) 21:21, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] ( edit conflict ) Delete I can't even find the books this guy has written via a search engine, much less secondary sources.  It's been tagged as not being shown to be notable for 8 years, no one will miss this.  Snowmanonahoe ( talk ) 21:21, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  In retrospect, the edit war was indeed overblown and it looks like that I (among others) missed the big picture...  And to make things worse, of those 50 words in the article, I'm not even sure that the book referenced was written by the article's subject, or an entirely different David Jones.  — That Coptic Guy ( let's talk? ) 21:26, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Overall fails to meet reference independent of the subject.  NP83 ( talk ) 21:34, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Fireman Sam .  Subject lacks sources for a stand alone article, but will fit into this article.  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 ).  Redirect to Fireman Sam .  As above, only high quality sources should be used.  Equine-man ( talk ) 14:48, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect WP:CHEAP Lightburst ( talk ) 18:22, 23 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: redirect
MobPartner: may be a good reason to redirect to Cheetah Mobile 扱.  し.  侍.  ( talk ) 08:37, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising and France .  Shellwood ( talk ) 09:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Here is the possible destination-redirect page Cheetah Mobile Inc 扱.  し.  侍.  ( talk ) 09:38, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:47, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Cheetah Mobile : per nomination, currently fails WP:NCORP .  Coco bb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs ) 12:44, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] No sources I find meet WP:ORGCRIT so the only ATD suitable would be a redirect .  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 08:21, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per nom. Polygnotus ( talk ) 07:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect for the reasons mentioned above. -- Assirian cat ( talk ) 09:51, 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: redirect
EC Music: Tooncool64 ( talk ) 03:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Sam Hui#EC Music (with the history preserved under the redirect) per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion .  I added an anchor to Sam Hui#EC Music and added a source that verifies Sam Hui released the album Life Is Good under the music label EC Music: Seto, Kit Yan (2008-01-24).  "Life is good for Samuel Hui" .  The Star .  Archived from the original on 2008-01-27 .  Retrieved 2024-02-13 .  The article notes: "Last September, Hui released his first album in 17 years, under the EC Music label.  “My new album is titled Yan Sang Doh Moh Hou (Life Is Good). I’ll be singing songs from it. We’ve also got a juke-box section where members of the audience will be able to request for songs that they want us to perform.”  A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article.  A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future.  Cunard ( talk ) 11:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Sam Hui#EC Music : per Cunard.  it doesn't read that self-promotional but isn't notable enough to be a full article Password (talk) (contribs) 05:42, 20 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: redirect
Argentina v Saudi Arabia (2022 FIFA World Cup): Fails WP:GNG and no enduring historical significance per WP:NEVENTS .  WP:BEFORE revealed only WP:ROUTINE coverage.  Search for "biggest World Cup shocks" revealed passing mentions but not enough to justify an independent article.  Stevie fae Scotland ( talk ) 19:32, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Football , Saudi Arabia ,  and Argentina .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I can see how you could make an argument it's notable, but this completely unsourced article is not that.  SportingFlyer T · C 19:59, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:08, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 2022 FIFA World Cup Group C#Argentina vs Saudi Arabia - not worth a separate article.  Giant Snowman 21:17, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Unreferenced and fails WP:NEVENTS .  LibStar ( talk ) 23:53, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This article is unnecessary and may cause some misunderstandings.  Reference 2022 FIFA World Cup Group C#Summary .  Annh07 ( talk ) 08:45, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 2022 FIFA World Cup Group C#Argentina vs Saudi Arabia as a valid WP:ATD .  Not enough coverage to warrant a separate article about this match.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 09:19, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I don't see why this needs a redirect based on page views and who visits the page.  [12] Govvy ( talk ) 07:37, 16 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: redirect
List of Webster University campus locations: Wikipedia is not the Yellow Pages.  Also fails WP:NLIST .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 10:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Lists ,  and United States of America .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 10:15, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  Necrothesp ( talk ) 10:26, 23 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!  06:25, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Webster University#Campus .  If it doesn't exist there, merge the citation so the source of the full list is still available to readers.  ~ Kvng ( talk ) 15:22, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Oppose a redirect, it's not a plausible search term.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 15:50, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] /agree but redirects are cheap.  // Timothy :: talk 06:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per above.  Redirects are cheap.  Fails NLIST and CLN as a stand alone list.  List entirely sourced to a single page on the subject website.  // Timothy :: talk 06:51, 2 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: redirect
Fatehpur Sanda College: Sohom ( talk ) 02:58, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , India ,  and Bihar .  Sohom ( talk ) 02:59, 3 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!  03:15, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  Necrothesp ( talk ) 12:15, 10 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!  01:24, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Magadh University .  - Indefensible ( talk ) 20:59, 17 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: redirect
Anouchka Besch: The subject has earned at least nine caps for the Luxembourg women's national football team .  I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 04:07, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Luxembourg .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 04:07, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:49, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect' as above.  Giant Snowman 21:17, 16 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: redirect
Graphisoft EcoDesigner: It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this.  Boleyn ( talk ) 19:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Environment .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:55, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : absence of SIGCOV suggests this fails NSOFT.  Owen× ☎ 22:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to ArchiCAD per IgelRM .  Owen× ☎ 00:00, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to ArchiCAD [10] IgelRM ( talk ) 23:23, 22 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: redirect
W31EZ-D: BMarGlines ( talk ) 08:20, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Illinois .  Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 25 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 12:37, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Illinois .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:40, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp. #Current stations .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 14:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.  : Another low-power TV station where the only known programming is national services and there appears to be little-to-no significant coverage — not particularly surprising for what ended up as an HC2/Innovate station.  (This is the channel sharing guest of separately-owned WESV-LD , but I don't think a merger in that direction is wise.)  As is typical for one of these stations, a nominal survivor of a bulk nomination from 2023 .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:12, 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: redirect
Igor the Assassin: The only other source is a book written by the wife of Alexander Litvinenko; I don't have access to the book so can't confirm whether it even discusses "Igor" at all.  Frankly the subject of the article appears to be a complete fabrication by the tabloid press.  CoconutOctopus talk 17:31, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete highly speculative without reliable sources castorbailey ( talk ) 19:28, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:51, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:52, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as one potential source does not an article make.   — Fourthords | =Λ= | 20:46, 18 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and redirect to Poisoning of Alexander Litvinenko .  Absolutely no need for a separate article.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 13:41, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I would argue against a merge; I don't think the GA-rated article about the poisoning would benefit from adding tabloid-sourced rumours.  CoconutOctopus talk 20:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect and add a sentence.  I have a copy of the book and it does not mention this supposed person at all.  However, this is kind of a weird note, the full name of this supposed assassin (Igor Vlasov) is mentioned in a few sources in the aftermath, having supposedly been on papers he was carrying in the immediate aftermath of the death.  https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/british-investigators-face-russian-obstacles/ https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2006-dec-06-fg-poison6-story.html He's mentioned in a different book, "The Litvinenko File : Politics, Polonium and Russia's war with itself" https://www.smh.com.au/world/poisoned-former-spys-russian-contact-out-of-reach-in-hospital-20061207-gdozts.html All mention an "Igor Vlasov" as being an initial suspect.  Almost certainly more mentions in Russian.  Mention as a footnote, maybe?  Definitely not a full article but it does seem to have been reliably noted.  It does seem like this guy existed.  PARAKANYAA ( talk ) 21:30, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
Violations of Chinese Communist Party Political Discipline: Recommend deleting and replacing with a redirect to Central Commission for Discipline Inspection .  Amigao ( talk ) 18:03, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions .  Amigao ( talk ) 18:03, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:44, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It certainly looks like this article contains no information not already present in the CCDI article, but that article is longer than my attention span, so I can't verify.  It also looks like this article references two sources the CCDI article doesn't: one by OECD (whoever they are), and one coauthored by Kjeld Erik Brødsgaard and himself wearing his faculty title.  I see it was written with the VisualEditor , so it's probably Zotero's google books translator, with Citoid propagating the error downstream and the article's author neglecting to clean it up.  Script generated citation issues aside, I think WP:BLAR to Central Commission for Discipline Inspection#Duties and responsibilities is the most reasonable outcome here, and if someone believes not all the content is present in the target article, the history will remain visible for salvage and incorporation.  Folly Mox ( talk ) 20:32, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Agreed with WP:BLAR to Central Commission for Discipline Inspection#Duties and responsibilities Amigao ( talk ) 21:10, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Central Commission for Discipline Inspection as content is repetitive.  Karnataka ( talk ) 17:53, 1 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: redirect