hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Haini Wolfgramm : In a WP:BEFORE search, I can only find passing mentions of him in articles about the band.  The Grammy nomination was for the band.  He and his large family were interviewed on a national TV programme in 1994, and that interview was covered by some other media, but that would appear to be WP:BLP1E , and doesn't quite get him over the line for WP:MUSICBIO.  A redirect to the band article could be an alternative to deletion , but I'm bringing it here first for discussion.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 05:14, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 05:14, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to The Jets (Minnesota band) .  He has done nothing independently notable outside the band, and the article is simply an attempt to fill space with some tidbits from his personal life.  The fact that he owns a small record company could possibly be mentioned briefly at the band's article.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 12:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I also recommend doing the same for Eugene Wolfgramm and Elizabeth Wolfgramm , for the exact same reasons. --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 12:43, 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!  05:50, 28 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!  06:29, 5 May 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, Daniel ( talk ) 11:01, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to The Jets (Minnesota band) as per WP:ATD .  Ingratis ( talk ) 21:33, 13 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
Once in a Lifetime (Gregorian song) : Binksternet ( talk ) 23:45, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions .  Binksternet ( talk ) 23:45, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Gregorian (band) : Found no evidence of notability.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 23:55, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Gregorian (band) .  No SIGCOV , fails WP:NSONG .  Has no individual notability.  ULPS ( talk ) 16:48, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect as per above.  Lacks sufficient coverage to justify a stand alone article.  Tutwakhamoe ( talk ) 04:36, 26 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
2023 Barbuda Council election: it's all fading away talk 00:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:34, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Antigua and Barbuda-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:34, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:34, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Extremely close paraphrasing of this news article , and excessive quotations, though the topic could be notable.  Curbon7 ( talk ) 11:31, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I think it passes NEVENTS as an event with lasting effects over a wide geographic scope , the entire island of Barbuda.  It is the equivalent of a statewide election in the U.S. or a Scottish parliamentary election.  - Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback ) 19:19, 14 April 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!  00:44, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  00:17, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Presidentman.  Mccapra ( talk ) 05:36, 28 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: no consensus
Beru Revue: The principal attempt at a notability claim here is that they had "one notable radio hit", but without any attempt at sourcing that the song was ever actually a hit -- NMUSIC #2 looking for IFPI -certified national pop charts on the order of Billboard , while music publicity mavens tend to indiscriminately attach the word "hit" to any song that ever got played on any radio station at all, so a song isn't automatically a notability-clinching "hit" just because you call it one without proper sourcing for that.  But there's no other strong notability claim here at all, the referencing is entirely to (deadlinked) primary sourcing and blogs that aren't support for notability without a shred of WP:GNG -building coverage about them shown, and the article has been flagged as needing better referencing since 2010 without improvement.  Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt them from having to have much, much better referencing than this.  Bearcat ( talk ) 14:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Pennsylvania .  Bearcat ( talk ) 14:06, 28 February 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!  06:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : A few articles in the Delco Times; [26] is an example.  I'm not sure how good of a source it is.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:24, 6 March 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!  02:01, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Meets GNG.  In addition to the above article in the Delco Times, I was able to find [27] [28] [29] ~ EDDY ( talk / contribs ) ~ 16:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – An easy pass per the WP:THREE raised by Editorofthewiki.  TLA tlak 02:16, 20 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, L iz Read!  Talk!  03:31, 20 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: no consensus
Najmadeen Mala: Notability tag since 2010.  Fails WP:AUTHOR .  UtherSRG (talk) 18:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Academics and educators , Authors ,  and Iraq .  UtherSRG (talk) 18:22, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Can be expanded with the references already present in https://ckb.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%86%DB%95%D8%AC%D9%85%DB%95%D8%AF%DB%8C%D9%86_%D9%85%DB%95%D9%84%D8%A7 Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 18:25, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Syria .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:34, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Eastmain.  No good rationale for deletion.  How can it possibly be a WP:BLP when he died in 1962?  A very basic failure of WP:BEFORE , I'm afraid.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 12:39, 4 July 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!  19:06, 4 July 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!  20:28, 11 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: no consensus
Embassy of the United States, Port of Spain: Biruitorul Talk 21:01, 9 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Trinidad and Tobago ,  and United States of America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:44, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete another unnecessary content fork that fails WP:ORG .  LibStar ( talk ) 00:47, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , meets WP:GNG .  Here, at the very least, an English-language WP:BEFORE should have been run through Google News.  Trinidad Express , Trinidad Express 22 , Loop News , Loop News 2 , St. Kitts and Nevis Observer , Guardian 1 , 2 , 3 , among others.  Pilaz ( talk ) 19:13, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That’s all worth a one-line summary in the bilateral relations article; a big, new, undistinguished office building isn’t remarkable in any way, routine coverage notwithstanding.  — Biruitorul Talk 20:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 21:33, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  01:32, 24 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: no consensus
Nemeton TV: While there's a fair amount of PR for this company floating around (e.g. [26] ), significant coverage is scarce.  The best examples I was able to find were this writeup of a university course that they sponsor and this article about their GAA coverage acquisition , which despite a promising title turns out to be almost entirely quotes directly from Nemeton's executives.  signed, Rosguill talk 18:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Ireland .  signed, Rosguill talk 18:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film , Companies , Sports ,  and Scotland .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:46, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment maybe the Nemeton TV is notable, however right not it's too related on primary sources and has lack of independent sources as said before.  -- Johnpaul2030 ( talk ) 08:12, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I did some research and added significant coverage from The Guardian source, along with some Irish local sources, though they lack significant coverage.  Maybe Irish folks could help more.  I think the page should be Kept.  Johnpaul2030 ( talk ) 09:21, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk ) 02:30, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 04:16, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep there are some press releases online, and coverage on industry websites, as you might expect for a television production company that has been in that business for more than 25 years.  As well as sponsoring some Royal Television Society Ireland and Scotland award categories, they had a nomination for Live Sport coverage at the RTS Scotland awards 2021.  Beyond some of the online sports news articles that mentions Nemeton TV, there is some substantive press coverage which I have added to the article, for example the GAA streaming coverage in Waterford News & Star or the return of Live Action TV and celebrating 25 years both published by the Irish Examiner.  Drchriswilliams ( talk ) 07:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , current sources in the article pass WP:GNG .  Suonii180 ( talk ) 23:23, 3 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: no consensus
Hot milk cake: WP:BEFORE check yielded no sources that show WP:SIGCOV .  BaduFerreira ( talk ) 13:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions .  BaduFerreira ( talk ) 13:35, 4 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:16, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .   Although it may not be obvious from the article (which I've not looked at), this is a baking technique for sponge cakes, rather than an individual recipe.   One of the earliest known recipes was published in 1911.  [44] It became popular during the Great Depression and wartime rationing.  [45] We have some information about how the cake works (the hot milk starts cooking the egg whites before the cake goes in the oven).  [46] WhatamIdoing ( talk ) 00:10, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Classic baking technique.  Already kept in an earlier AfD.  The Banner talk 15:47, 12 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!  07:53, 18 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: no consensus
The Curve (shopping mall): Could not find significant coverage, many of the sources identified in the last AfD are now dead links.  LibStar ( talk ) 23:30, 9 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Shopping malls and Malaysia .  • Gene93k ( talk ) 05:17, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:38, 16 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!  23:09, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I found some sources about the subject [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] , but I haven't really made an opinion about whether they meet WP:SIGCOV , as they are more focused on events there.  If we include the next-door eCurve (which I don't think is part of the article), there would be a lot more sources.  JML1148 ( Talk | Contribs ) 00:04, 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: no consensus
WBNM-LD: [ [2] ] probably qualifies, but one source isn't enough.  Let'srun ( talk ) 14:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Kentucky .  Let'srun ( talk ) 14:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Here's #2 .  Those two sources alone help.  It's understandable that coverage of this LPTV trails off into nothing.  The fact that it was supposed to be a Star Television Network affiliate (as in your source) is a surprise.  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 19:05, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk ) 17:44, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Soft Keep .  All the sources so far scream WP:ROUTINE , even including a local fight over an antenna (snooze), and I couldn't find anything else substantial, but I have a soft spot for almanac entries in the Wikipedia, and that's how I think of populated places as well as radio/TV stations of any size.  They are what we may call naturally connecting subjects that provide information that everyday folks may be looking up.  Per that and WP:NOTPAPER , I can't see that keeping it particularly harms an encyclopedia.  Stefen Tower s among the rest!  Gab • Gruntwerk 07:20, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, North America 1000 19:02, 25 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: no consensus
Knysna fine art: My confidence in the sources is not enhanced by the fact that all of them are blocked by the library where I edit.  TheLongTone ( talk ) 13:32, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts , Visual arts , Museums and libraries ,  and South Africa .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:39, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The sources are accessible for me.  Some are not independent, but I believe this contributes to N:ORG while this is not likely independent content.  Weak keep as I imagine there's some offline sourcing.  I'll look for it while this is at AfD.  Star Mississippi 13:36, 27 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I have added the online sources where these are available DoubleTripleYou ( talk ) 09:34, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I submit that the subject of the article should be eligible for publication as the gallery in question is the largest of its kind in South Africa.  I have added additional sources since first publication DoubleTripleYou ( talk ) 09:34, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  10:30, 4 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 13:06, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The article is promotional, stating It is considered one of the top contemporary galleries in South Africa with a citation to a travel guide and no further information about why it might be considered important.  Also states Read, who is considered one of the foremost authorities on contemporary South African art with citation to the gallery's site and a tour guide.  -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 01:42, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:28, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: looking at the sources as a whole, what doesn't fail WP:V fails WP:N .  Not part of my consideration but notable to the discussion is the concerns about WP:PROMOTION .  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish ) 16:00, 19 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: no consensus
Bassel al-Assad Stadium: The disambiguation should be deleted per WP:ONEOTHER : If there are only two topics to which a given title might refer, and one is the primary topic, then a disambiguation page is not needed—it is sufficient to use a hatnote on the primary topic article, pointing to the other article.  (This means that readers looking for the second topic are spared the extra navigational step of going through the disambiguation page.)  Toptanazikov ( talk ) 06:22, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disambiguations .  Toptanazikov ( talk ) 06:22, 20 October 2023 (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/2023 October 20 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 06:48, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : neither has been identified as the Primary Topic, and page views don't show a massive difference.  Pam D 07:18, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Syria-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:44, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 15:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Could make Bassel al-Assad Stadium (Homs) primary and add a hatnote.  The Homs article had a lot more traffic in the past and still has a little more.  Flurrious ( talk ) 22:35, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Maliner ( talk ) 19:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:49, 10 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: no consensus