hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Norconex Web Crawler : A redirect to Web crawler#Open-source crawlers would probably be the best option.  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 14:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology , Internet ,  and Software .  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 14:56, 7 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Web crawler#Open-source crawlers : per nomination, currently fails WP:GNG with no significant coverage at all from independent sources Coco bb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs ) 15:04, 7 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] There are 5 references listed which from independent sources.  Please also take a look at Mentions in Academic Research portion where academic research with mentions of the Crawler are listed.  These are  independent sources as well.  OhTwadi ( talk ) 22:51, 8 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] All of which having barely significant coverage...  TappyTurtle [ talk | contribs ] 02:05, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Also, I see other open source crawlers which have much less in terms of content and/or references and yet are considered fine.  One example: MnoGoSearch OhTwadi ( talk ) 22:53, 8 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] From what I could see, that article was considered "no consensus, with no prejudice against speedy renomination".  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 11:48, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:22, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Web_crawler#Open-source_crawlers : The subject fails to meet WP:GNG .  Medium.com and blogs can’t establish notability.  It would be better to redirect this article to Web_crawler#Open-source_crawlers .  Grab Up - Talk 16:31, 21 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
Alf Davies (swimmer) : Happy to keep if significant, non-routine coverage can be found.  As an WP:ATD , the page title should be redirected to Swimming at the 1908 Summer Olympics – Men's 200 metre breaststroke .  Raised as an example at this Village pump discussion .  Suriname0 ( talk ) 18:13, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Sports , Olympics ,  and England .  Suriname0 ( talk ) 18:13, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - Pinging User:Blue_Square_Thing , User:BeanieFan11 , User:Simeon .  Suriname0 ( talk ) 18:18, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I haven't looked into this, but if no significant, non-routine coverage can be found, then redirect to the Olympic event.  I think that's better than deletion as it's reasonable to redirect Olympians that don't have an article.  - Simeon ( talk ) 18:47, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] To clarify, that's what I'm proposing in the nom.  I'm not sure if there's a better venue for discussing contested redirects; RfC, maybe?  But AfD has been conventionally used for this.  Suriname0 ( talk ) 19:17, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Edit: I see there's actually a redirect for this purpose already: WP:CONRED .  Looks like AfD is the appropriate venue.  Suriname0 ( talk ) 19:20, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect Can't find anything besides name in result lists.  Kingsif ( talk ) 21:39, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Given the details we have available in Olympedia it seems very likely that sources will exist, possibly in The Times or other newspapers from the time, maybe in other sources.  That suggests to me that this is a clear and obvious redirect option per ATD.  Blue Square Thing ( talk ) 08:07, 1 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
Kamalapur (neighbourhood) : Does not meet wp:notability.    A neighborhood in the city of Dhaka.   Clearly does not have presumed wp:notability under the SNG per the criteria there which leaves GNG.     The only source is a blog and even that just gives it a one word mention.  So no sourcing much less the required GNG sources.  North8000 ( talk ) 20:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bangladesh-related deletion discussions .  Owen× ☎ 22:05, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Kamal Siddiqui et al.'s 2010 Social Formation in Dhaka, 1985-2005: A Longitudinal Study of Society in a Third World Megacity ISBN 978-1-4094-1103-1 contains half a page about the concentration of the city's Buddhists in Kamalapur and the adjacent Basabo neighborhood, describing the related viharas, pagodas, and schools there.  Other than that, sources of any depth focus on Kamalapur railway station , about which we already have an article.  -- Worldbruce ( talk ) 03:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Motijheel Thana , of which Kamalapur is the easternmost slice, until sufficient in-depth reliable sources are written about the neighborhood to justify a stand alone article.  -- Worldbruce ( talk ) 03:22, 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!  23:33, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect as suggested to Motijheel Thana .  Right now, there is a single source in the article, which constitutes WP:OR .  Bearian ( talk ) 15:21, 4 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: redirect
Samantha Banfield : All that came up in my searches were passing mentions ( 2018 , 2019 , 2020 , 2021 , 2022 , 2023 , etc.) No evidence of notability.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:52, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football , Canada , Caribbean ,  and South America .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:52, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect as above.  Giant Snowman 19:41, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect – Per nom.  Svartner ( talk ) 22:34, 23 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
Chacha Chaudhary (2019 TV series) : It only has one ref.  M S Hassan ( talk ) 16:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Comics and animation ,  and India .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:11, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Chacha_Chaudhary#Adaptation : Obvious WP:ATD .  - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 19:30, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Agreed, the article in question doesn't include anything that will be missed if moved into Chacha_Chaudhary#Adaptation .  - Mjks28 ( talk ) 13:36, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Chacha_Chaudhary#Adaptation .  RangersRus ( talk ) 14:45, 24 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: redirect
Commissioner for Human Rights of the Republic of Azerbaijan : There is no independent reliable sources of the body, and there is nothing that suggests that this is a meaningful entity in Azerbaijani politics or that it actually does anything on human rights matters.  Thenightaway ( talk ) 19:05, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 20:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Human rights in Azerbaijan : no independent notability for this government body.  Owen× ☎ 21:44, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, TLA (talk) 12:00, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails GNG and NORG, sources fails WP:IS.  BEFORE found nothing that meets WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS.  Azerbaijan government sources are not independent reliable sources for the subject.  No objection to a consensus redirect to Human rights in Azerbaijan .  // Timothy :: talk 05:41, 21 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
Hy-Gain Antennas and Rotators : The only two sources cited are PR from the company itself and a WP:BEFORE search reveals only promotional information rather than any WP:SIGCOV .  This company is likely notable within the ham radio hobbyist sphere, but I'm not seeing any justification for a Wikipedia article.  Flip Format ( talk ) 09:31, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio , Companies , Engineering ,  and United States of America .  Flip Format ( talk ) 09:31, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mississippi and Nebraska .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:09, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep ' - it is notable in its little world. Unfortunately I'm traveling and not in a position to go digging for refs in the obscure but reliable refs. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 12:35, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm striking my "keep" for now, pending refs. -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 12:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I left a note at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Amateur radio -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 12:51, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge or redirect to MFJ Enterprises , of which it is a subsidiary. A quick search shows some coverage, [34] , [35] , and maybe, not sure about reliability: [36] . Basic facts about the company and its products are verifiable, as well as some of it's history. I don't know if this is enough coverage for GNG, but it is enough verifiability to merge verifiable bits to MFJ, which places the former company in a modern context. -- {{u| Mark viking }} { Talk } 21:22, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge or redirect to the parent, MFJ Enterprises . Jacona ( talk ) 22:10, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to its parent company MFJ Enterprises . Fails WP:GNG per nom. SBKSPP ( talk ) 03:11, 18 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
Your Old Used to Be : This literally just states that the song exists, the end, and cites absolutely no sources at all -- but the mere fact that a song charted somewhere is not in and of itself an instant notability freebie that exempts a song from actually having to have any sourcing to support any substantive content about it, so this as written is not enough all by itself. Obviously I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with much better access to archived US media coverage from the 1960s than I've got can find enough sourcing to salvage it -- but nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt it from having to have any sourcing.  Bearcat ( talk ) 13:29, 10 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Faron Young - I cannot find any evidence of independent notability, but a redirect would be appropriate since the song clearly exists and charted.  — Ganesha811 ( talk ) 20:05, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and United States of America .  Bearcat ( talk ) 13:29, 10 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
QtRuby : Wikipedia seems to generally be lenient in enforcing notability policy for open-source software projects, but notability isn't established by the currently-cited sources.  A determined editor could probably dig up some ancient reviews in a WP:BEFORE search, but I'm content that Wikipedia is not lacking as an encyclopedia by not having this article.  Daask ( talk ) 21:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  Daask ( talk ) 21:17, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - nowhere near notable enough for an article.  Sgubaldo ( talk ) 13:23, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge : trimmed (2-3 sentences max len), properly sourced material into Qt (software)#Language bindings .  As it stands this is an unnneeded CFORK, a proper merge will improve the target.  // Timothy :: talk 16:35, 21 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
Princess Marie Alexandra of Schleswig-Holstein : Wkipedia is not a genealogical website.  I have no idea what those external links even mean.  Surtsicna ( talk ) 22:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Women , Royalty and nobility ,  and Germany .  Surtsicna ( talk ) 22:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no sources, and the external links appear to be regarding another person.  The content of the article has not improved within the last 8 years.  EmilySarah99 ( talk ) 13:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to her father, Wilhelm Friedrich, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein .  Worth noting that she does not have an article on de-wiki either.  -- asilvering ( talk ) 00:02, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to her father, Wilhelm Friedrich, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein per WP:ATD .  Ingratis ( talk ) 06:46, 18 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
Connell Wagner : BuySomeApples ( talk ) 06:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Engineering ,  and Australia .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 11:07, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Aurecon .  LibStar ( talk ) 05:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Aurecon : Primary notability lies elsewhere.  Not enough content to bother with a merge.  Tar nis hed Path talk 12:45, 27 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
Carlo Robelli : Does not seem to pass WP:NPRODUCT .  Whole lots of sale listings and some forum posts mainly.  No sources since 2010.  Contested PROD.  StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music , Business , Products ,  and United States of America .  StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 19:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No product coverage outside of sales listings.  I don't see anything even in period newspapers we'd use.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:13, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Newspaper classified ad from the 1930s.  [31] Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:15, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Sam Ash Music as a plausible search term Mach61 ( talk ) 20:19, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:30, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect as suggested: valid search term.  Bearian ( talk ) 16:09, 27 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
Luke station : – dlthewave ☎ 04:02, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Transportation .  – dlthewave ☎ 04:02, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 04:41, 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 would be the wisest choice.  TH1980 ( talk ) 01:56, 20 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 ) 10:28, 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
Manini (1979 film) : Sources in article and found in BEFORE do not meet WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth.  Found listings, interviews, nothing that addresses the subject indepth meeting WP:SIGCOV.  // Timothy :: talk 08:32, 8 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India .  Shellwood ( talk ) 09:25, 8 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or Redirect to List_of_Kannada_films_of_1979 .  Film does exist but the page has poor unreliable sources.  Not much can be found other than on imdb and watchable link on Amazon Prime Video.  RangersRus ( talk ) 12:49, 8 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Hello@ RangersRus , have you seen Liz's relist comment below?  Both targets seem OK but in general, I think when the director or writer has a page, it seems more appropriate to redirect a film there than to a list (even if a list by year is really not a bad target).  If you agree, can you leave a note?  If you don't, please consider I obviously will not oppose a redirect to the list you mention.  Best, - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 15:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to K._S._Sethumadhavan#Selected_filmography - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 13:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Two different Redirect target articles suggested.  We need to settle on one.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to K._S._Sethumadhavan#Selected_filmography : I will suggest to redirect this article to K._S._Sethumadhavan#Selected_filmography director’s page will be more appropriate.  Grab Up - Talk 16:50, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to K._S._Sethumadhavan#Selected_filmography .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 20:17, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep or Redirect to List_of_Kannada_films_of_1979 I agree with one the suggestions to redirect or keep.  Sanwalniazik ( talk ) 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
Triton (programming language) : Artem.G ( talk ) 11:11, 25 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Does not meet WP:BASIC and has minimal content.  If kept, it should be merged with another article.  Pumpkinspyce ( talk • contribs ) 00:45, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to OpenAI Anton.bersh ( talk ) 22:12, 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
BK XXL : Most references are to first party nutritional guides.  Skipple ☎ 19:48, 9 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions .  Skipple ☎ 19:48, 9 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products , Middle East ,  and Europe .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:40, 9 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion due to previous bundled AfD .  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk ) 23:31, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete not exactly a Big Mac or Whopper, don't see why it needs its own article.  AryKun ( talk ) 06:59, 22 May 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!  23:11, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't think that this can be retained as a standalone article.  However, a redirect to Big King#BK XXL is plausible.  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 14:58, 24 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: redirect