hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Prince Abdulaziz bin Musa'ed Sports City : No evidence of wp:notability under SNG or GNG.    The SNG says that stadiums are not presumed notable and must meet GNG.    There is only one source and it is just a very brief database type listing on the ministry of sports website.  I'm generally more lenient than the  guidelines on stadiums but this one misses the guidelines by a mile.  Tagged by others for sources since December with no additions since the tagging.  North8000 ( talk ) 03:14, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  The Arabic article has several references that could be added.  See ar:          مدينة الأمير عبد العزيز بن مساعد الرياضية Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 03:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture , Football ,  and Saudi Arabia .  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 03:42, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and redirect to Ḥaʼil , It says it's a multi-use stadium, so merge and redirect to the city it's in.  Govvy ( talk ) 09:57, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  The stadium opened in 1981.  There ought to have been lots of print and broadcast media coverage when plans to build it were announced and when it was officially opened.  I don't read Arabic, though, and I don't know where I would find archives of Saudi media from around 1981.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 13:45, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 11:16, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Al-Tai FC where it is mentioned - it is not mentioned at Ḥaʼil , and in any event it is primarily a football stadium.  Giant Snowman 11:19, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Stadium is notably used by two professional teams in Saudi Arabia.  One of which plays in the Saudi Pro League.  -- Tshak13 ( talk ) 01:37, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep clearly meets WP:GNG with the sources already in the article, though it also appears to have been WP:HEYed .  SportingFlyer T · C 16:09, 2 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Meets WP:GNG Lightburst ( talk ) 20:48, 4 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Rugby League Conference North West Premier : Can't seem to find any sources for this or relevant information elsewhere on Wikipedia.  Article unreferenced and unvarifyable, WP:TNT may apply.  Mn1548 ( talk ) 20:37, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 June 11 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 21:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Rugby league ,  and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:08, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : As it is known where this league falls into the wider structure via refs on the RLC page, I would lean towards keeping the article if a few more references could be found.  Will work on incorporating those refs onto this page.  Mn1548 ( talk ) 16:33, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Alternative : Redirect to North West Men's League .  Mn1548 ( talk ) 15:02, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Update after 1 week : Merge and Redirect to North West Men's League as successor competition.  Mn1548 ( talk ) 16:52, 18 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: keep
ION International Film Festival : Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:38, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:36, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:55, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .   It gets SIGCOV in this 2009 CNN piece Traveling film festival lands in heart of troubled Niger Delta , and in this Reuters piece Nigeria an unlikely stop on film-festival circuit .  That is two SIGCOVs from two WP:RS/Ps .  Aszx5000 ( talk ) 16:06, 3 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The Reuters article is also repeated in The Hollywood Reporter (also an RS/P) here Spirit of optimism shines through at Nigerian film fest ; shows that the core "film trade" also recognize the festival.  Aszx5000 ( talk ) 17:06, 3 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
2023 Mableton mayoral election : It has not been covered by any media outside of the Atlanta metropolitan area, failing WP:GEOSCOPE and WP:GNG .  Sounder Bruce 04:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Georgia (U.S. state) .  Sounder Bruce 04:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Academic regalia of Columbia University : Very little in-depth independent coverage.  Filetime ( talk ) 20:19, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep.  Article topic is covered in significant depth in the Wolgast article (59 pages solely dedicated to this topic), as well as in the books on the general history of academic regalia in the United States and the adoption of the Intercollegiate Code of Academic Costume.  Normsupon ( talk ) 06:32, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Education ,  and New York .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:11, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep.  In line with other Academic regalia of... articles such as Harvard and Stanford.  Well sourced and citations given.  - Fuzheado | Talk 18:17, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  Necrothesp ( talk ) 15:19, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Per Normsupon.  A Washington Post 2017 article on University regalia has a section on Columbia ( Why caps and gowns at graduation? Let’s go back 900 years ), underlying Fuzheado's point (above) that it is as notable as other Universities.  Aszx5000 ( talk ) 20:57, 2 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Not clear at all to me why this article would be deleted.  Also like every year I got to a college graduation to try and figure out who is wearing what and why I come to this page and the one on Stanford, and Harvard, and Oxford and Cambridge and a few others.  Jjazz76 ( talk ) 01:14, 3 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep enough for WP:GNG KylieTastic ( talk ) 15:13, 4 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep passes WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 20:27, 4 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Jamath Shoffner : Joeykai ( talk ) 03:43, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Germany , Ireland , Luxembourg ,  and North Carolina .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:13, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I found [31] , [32] , [33] , [34] , [35] , [36] , [37] , among many more sources.  Ongoing coaching career with pro Belgian team (helping them reach semifinal of Belgian Cup) and has coached one of most high profile Luxembourg teams (F91 Dudelange) and was assistant of Luxembourg natiomal team and a Major League Soccer team, not to mention a pro playing career.  Article needs improvement, not deletion.  Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk ) 05:02, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 18:22, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources above which show notability.  Giant Snowman 18:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources above.  Pelotas talk | contribs 04:31, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources above.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 06:41, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Dhaka Union of Journalists : The remainder of the sources are not enough to establish notability.  Bremps ... 00:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media , Organizations ,  and Bangladesh .  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 04:56, 5 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per " The Dhaka Union of Journalists (DUJ) is the biggest unit. The pro-BNP group has some 7,000 members with 14 units across the country " and various sources that can be located from a simple WP:BEFORE .  One of the largest trade unions in Bangladesh, one of the largest countries in the world, representing thousands of professional journalists, is the type of article an encyclopedia should have.  We should use WP:COMMONSENSE regarding articles such as this.  Vinegarymass911 ( talk ) 00:01, 6 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!  00:49, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Vinegarymass911 rationale and a quick search which reveals this is a 70+ old active and prominent organization that has been cited in numerous books and periodicals for decades.  Recommend withdrawing the nomination.  WilsonP NYC ( talk ) 17:17, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] WilsonP NYC , please be specific about the numerous books and periodicals you found.  It would help your argument to actually name those sources or even link to them.  L iz Read!  Talk!  07:51, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Per WP:BEFORE, prior to this nomination “the minimum search expected is a normal Google search , a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search” and doing so for this article leaves fairly little doubt that this step was skipped.  WilsonP NYC ( talk ) 02:35, 14 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: keep
Wang Guangyang : Was sent to draft, but returned to mainspace without improvement.   I asked User:Folly Mox to take a look and see if they could improve the sourcing, and they did work on the article, but as they said on their talk page, the subject is a bit out of their area of expertise.   I can't find any in-depth sourcing, so it fails WP:GNG .  Onel 5969 TT me 12:37, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , History ,  and China .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:40, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – a quick Google Books search turns up enough to meet GNG: [10] [11] [12] [13] (and many other sources available with a search for "汪廣洋").  — Mx.  Granger ( talk · contribs ) 13:53, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oops – I misinterpreted the talk page request to improve the formatting of the citations, not to find additional sources.  The article subject has got his own chapter subheading in the Ming Shi .  The reason I didn't add any additional citations is because they'd all point to the same spot.  I suspect I have access to the same versions of most of the standard histories as our Chinese language editors who cite using search strings instead of page numbers.  It's actually quicker to look up that way, especially if the source is not famous enough to earn a modern punctuated edition.  This person's actually notable enough to be covered by modern historians (Mx. Granger's links 2 and 3 above each provide significant coverage), but I claim that the people with biographies in the standard histories are all going to pass GNG.  We may only have one surviving source describing their life, but it's been put together from various lost sources by professional historians, who considered them important enough to create space for those people's stories in the execution of their historiography.  I have no reason to question their professional opinions, no matter how long they've been dead for.  Folly Mox ( talk ) 15:50, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep onel5969 what a shit! how dare you.  He was the prime minister of Ming dynasty.  Clealy passes WP:NPOL , a lot of source in Chinese language found.  49.237.19.178 ( talk ) 07:00, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- The subject is clearly notable.  Except in BLP cases, a lack of citations is not a ground for deletion.  The article is tagged for needing more citations; and should remain so.  It needs improvement not deletion, unless of course it is a HOAX. Peterkingiron ( talk ) 18:33, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . Clearly notable. -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 10:32, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Swatting of American politicians (2023–2024) : At present this article seems to be little more than a list of news articles with no wider encyclopaedic merit ( WP:NOTNEWS ).  There doesn't appear to be any evidence to link any of these events other than a rather arbitrary time period that feels created by editors, which there amounts to Wikipedia assigning correlation where there may be none ( WP:OR ).  Given the contentious topic nature of the subject matter feel it's best that the article be removed from at least main space until such a time it's improved or demonstrates merit for inclusion.  Rambling Rambler ( talk ) 14:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Politicians , Crime , Politics ,  and United States of America .  Rambling Rambler ( talk ) 14:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as discussed on the article talk page , multiple reliable sources referred to the incidents in relationship with one another and noted that some politicians reacted with the proposed legislation to enact harsher sentences for swatting.  ~ Pbritti ( talk ) 14:13, 9 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I agree with the above argument.  PARAKANYAA ( talk ) 23:31, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Owen× ☎ 17:20, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  This is part of a notable pattern of harnessing elected officials.  It doesn't seem to be going away, and has the possibility of getting worse, or spreading to other countries.  — Maile ( talk ) 16:12, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  108.18.142.185 ( talk ) 23:34, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  per Maile, I don't see the issue resolving itself soon anytime either and it is not an isolated case Wiiformii ( talk ) 15:43, 21 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: keep
Duncan Campbell (settler) : 05:44, 6 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Military , South Africa ,  and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Has an entry in the Dictionary of South African Biography , so meets WP:ANYBIO #3.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 13:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  05:54, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] In addition to Necrothesp 's two sources I have found a third.   There are furthermore a couple of shorter biographies in other works to be had.  Uncle G ( talk ) 07:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 02:55, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  National DNB entry is definitive evidence of notability per WP:ANYBIO #3.  Jfire ( talk ) 05:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep DNB entry and others.  Lightburst ( talk ) 19:26, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Julien Boisselier : Only database entries and copies of Wikipedia.  Password (talk) (contribs) 08:24, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Please withdraw this.  Press XfD on the wrong article.  Password (talk) (contribs) 08:26, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Peak Mountain (disambiguation) : Primary topic article has a hatnote to the only other use.  Pinging @ Boleyn : who removed PROD in good faith.  Shhhnotsoloud ( talk ) 11:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Disambiguations .  Shhhnotsoloud ( talk ) 11:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This one is very difficult to research.   But some careful adjustments led to a 19th century publication Guy's Pocket Cyclopaedia that referred to the hill into which Peak Cavern extends as Peak Mountain.   I cannot find evidence that this is a 21st century name, however.   There's a 19th century Cyclists' Touring Club guidebook that also refers to a Peak Mountain in the same area, although on modern on-line maps accessible to me, to the north of Eldon Hill is merely Peakshill.  James Montgomery wrote a poem called The Peak Mountain .   Other than those, everything else seems to have something in front of "Peak".  Uncle G ( talk ) 13:06, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:01, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] keep ; added two mo items found in Wikipedia.  - Altenmann >talk 21:48, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Goodonyer!   I did try to find some other Peak Mountains in … well … countries more likely to have actual mountains.   ☺  No success.   Too many false positives for " Something Peak Mountain" or repetitions of the two that we already had.   Both of the gazetteers that I consulted (a modern one and an old Lippincott's ) didn't even list the Peak Mountains that we started with.  Uncle G ( talk ) 09:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Now a valid dab page.  Pam D 07:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep but reorganize.  I don't think this is a case where there is a right or wrong answer.  There is no primary topic and I think there are probably other "Peak Mountains" that meet NGEO.  So I think we should: Move Peak Mountain to Peak Mountain (Connecticut) Move Peak Mountain (disambiguation) to Peak Mountain So that the main article is the dab, and the other Peak Mountains are parenthetically dabed and included.  // Timothy :: talk 08:21, 4 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: keep
Digital Music News : Despite the large number of references, it's basically all WP:REFSPAM , where DMN is passingly mentioned, but there is no significant coverage.  There is no in-depth coverage as far as I can see.  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 19:19, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw I intend to cleanup this article once this AfD is closed.  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 00:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism , Music ,  and United States of America .  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 19:19, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:NOTCLEANUP .  Yes, the article is written badly (sorry Pi314m, but your prose almost reads like a punched card ).  While someone really needs to come in with a shovel and remove all of the WP:REFBOMBing , WP:NCORP says, ... please consider whether they have had any significant or demonstrable effects on culture, society, entertainment ... .  From sources like NPR and The Atlantic it seems that this outlet led by Paul Resnikoff has indeed been able to do things like persuading streaming platforms to excise certain content from their platforms, with all of the cultural fallout that entails.  I would argue that this coverage has been borderline significant, since they seem to attach weight to what the owner of this outlet thinks and has accomplished.  I can't check the NYT refs, so I don't know to what extent they are passing references, as is Newsweek , but I assume that this is just enough for a WP:NBASIC profile.  Stony Brook babble 01:34, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - the references on the article show the subject does indeed have some notability.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 05:53, 20 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!  20:14, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: From the sources provided here, this subject clearly does pass WP:BASIC .  User:Let'srun 20:31, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep but needs an ambitious editor to cleanup the machine gun prose.  See WP:OVERCITE Lightburst ( talk ) 00:41, 22 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: keep