hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Shanghai police database leak : Article would need an entire rewrite to improve.  Dawnbails ( talk ) 22:54, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Nomination withdrawn; mistake on my end when remembering a deletion policy.  Dawnbails ( talk ) 14:14, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions .  Dawnbails ( talk ) 22:54, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep.  There is sufficient notability here and implied significance; appears to be an unfolding issue.  If anyone fluent in Mandarin can moderate the sources and restructure the article; I think someone just needs to be bold and edit it for quality rather than deletion.  Cliffordben1994 ( talk ) 23:15, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep This article is definitely notable.  It already passes WP:GNG through the Bloomberg and WSJ sources, and there are more online from AP , Al Jazeera and The Guardian .  Sure, it needs some writing work, but not worthy of deletion and definitely notable.  Nom, please conduct WP:BEFORE searches before nominating an article for deletion.  JML1148 ( Talk | Contribs ) 01:46, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] For some reason the Al Jazeera link doesn't want to work.  I'll put it here in full.  https://www.aljazeera.com/economy/2022/7/6/hackers-offer-data-on-1-billion-chinese-after-alleged-leak JML1148 ( Talk | Contribs ) 01:48, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And the AP one, for some reason.  https://apnews.com/article/technology-china-hong-kong-shanghai-ce27c6ef6f6d31ce917ee27f80c9589d JML1148 ( Talk | Contribs ) 01:49, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Multiple high-profile in-depth coverage from mainstream outlets as noted by JML1148 Please don't make AfD nominations like this.  If an article needs a re-write, tag it.  Jack4576 ( talk ) 06:24, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yep, in this case, it was sheer laziness that stopped them from doing a 30-second Google search, if that, and find multiple reliable sources.  JML1148 ( Talk | Contribs ) 06:25, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] My main point of the nomination was more so that the article was incoherent; however, I did remember a deletion policy wrong and that's my bad.  Feel free to close.  Dawnbails ( talk ) 14:05, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 10:51, 14 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: speedy keep
Wellington Carvalho : @ Simione001 asked that this be moved to AfD so here we are.  I'm willing to withdraw this nomination if the article is improved to include at least two sources.  Normally this kind of behavior at AfD isn't appropriate.  We never hold articles hostage to improve them.  But when it comes to living people we have a higher standard which includes citing sources for out claims.  That's a really easy standard to pass and it matters.  Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝 ) 09:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Bibliographies ,  and Brazil .  Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝 ) 09:32, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:06, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep on the basis of the references at the corresponding article in the Portuguese-language Wikipedia at https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wellington_Carvalho The nominator should have looked at the Portuguese-language article before making the nomination.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 10:09, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as per above.  Simione001 ( talk ) 23:12, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Per above.  200+ appearances in pro leagues with many sources...  Article needs improvement, not deletion .  @ Dr vulpes : , I added three sources to the article, please withdraw nomination.  Thanks, Das osmnezz ( talk ) 16:17, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - sources added seem sufficient to pass WP:GNG .  The Portuguese Wikipedia article also shows notability.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:58, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources above which show notability.  Giant Snowman 18:47, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 22:03, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Has sources and now passes.  Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:38, 13 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: speedy keep
Ify Obinabo: Does not meet NPOL.  Best, Reading Beans ( talk ) 07:38, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Nigeria .  Reading Beans ( talk ) 07:38, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Promotional, lacks notability - "Obinabo said that God is her mentor as well as Raymond Obieri, the former chairman of Intercontinental Bank." is the stuff of legends - the dance of the celestial and temporal.  Fails WP:GNG; WP:NPOL.  Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 16:14, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:39, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : She may not meet WP:NPOL , but she may still be notable.  She's the first woman to hold a local office, and appears to have been Commissioner for Women and Social Welfare for the state at one point, and spearheaded the creation of domestic violence courts .  She may be notable given all of these together, plus there is a lot of Google News sourcing I didn't have time to check.  TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk ) 20:03, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I’ll withdraw and move to draft as being a commissioner satisfies NPOL.  Best, Reading Beans ( talk ) 08:34, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That's at State, not national level...  Best Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 08:37, 21 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] ...state/province -wide office.  Best, Reading Beans ( talk ) 14:04, 21 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: withdrawn
Innovation Unit: No WP:SIGCOV found on a WP:BEFORE .  WikiOriginal-9 ( talk ) 04:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Education , Social science ,  and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:11, 13 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: withdrawn
Jaynez: As I said, there is "No appearance of notability beyond maybe the Native American Music Awards , though those are themselves questionable (see their page)".  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 12:02, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and New Mexico .  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 12:02, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - A simple, quick search online reveals that he won a Grammy Award in 2005 and meets GNG.  I've added a few citations and some content; more improvements can be made.  It seems that the nominator might not have performed a WP:BEFORE .  Netherzone ( talk ) 15:05, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] As I said in my removal of it just now, that's not a Grammy Award which exists and the source was confusing it with the Native American Music Award (aka the Nammy) which is already mentioned.  Notice the same source getting it right in the other article of theirs you added: "Jaynez, who last year won the Native American Music Award for best new artist" from an article dated in 2005.  You accuse me of not performing a BEFORE (which I did, don't be ridiculous) and yet you didn't bother to check Grammy Award for Best New Artist#2000s to confirm who won in 2005 (It was Maroon 5 and Jaynez wasn't even nominated).  I appreciate your effort finding and adding those sources.  Personally, I don't think just two websites (one of which doesn't feel all that reliable if they don't know the difference between the Grammys and the Nammys) is enough to meet the burden of GNG, and I haven't changed my mind about deleting this yet.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 15:18, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Please do not remove citations that have useable content just because you disagree with a sentence.  Netherzone ( talk ) 15:47, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There's no disagreeing, just you adding a false statement and me removing it and the source which was solely supporting that statement at the time.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 16:29, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - the notability is low-key, maybe even borderline, as most of the publications are small.  But I think it passes the basic threshold.  - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 22:01, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Alright, now I'm willing to withdraw .  No clue how none of these results came up in my search but clearly there's enough here now that I'm just gonna step aside and let Netherzone handle the rest.  Thanks!  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 06:20, 17 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: withdrawn
InFORM Decisions: No WP:SIGCOV found on a WP:BEFORE .  WikiOriginal-9 ( talk ) 03:27, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Computing , Software ,  and California .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 03:43, 13 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: withdrawn
Sunwin: Schminnte ( talk • contribs ) 14:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and China .  Schminnte ( talk • contribs ) 14:20, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] * Draftify/Move into my userspace.  Google search using the Chinese name for the company brings up 19 million results, which should be more than enough to dig through for some sources.  That being said I don't think this article should be rushed to bring onto the mainspace until more work is done.  I may work on it more after it is drafitified.  SBS6577P ( talk ) 23:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Now that Gorden 2211 has successfully expanded the article on the history of the company, and also since more sources have been added, changing my vote to keep .  The article still has tons to expand on, but for now it should be enough to demonstrate notability.  SBS6577P ( talk ) 14:01, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep This company has a long history under different names, and is still a major manufacturer in China.  There are still parts of the history to fill out, but the current history already makes the company notable with in-depth coverage by different news sources.  There should also be articles in various languages spoken in South America, as the company has been popular there, but I don't know that language.  Gorden 2211 ( talk ) 06:53, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:HEY .  — Mx.  Granger ( talk · contribs ) 14:10, 22 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: withdrawn
Indo Global Social Service Society: No WP:SIGCOV found on a WP:BEFORE .  WikiOriginal-9 ( talk ) 03:25, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness , Organizations , Education , Economics , Environment , Social science ,  and Delhi .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 03:31, 13 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: withdrawn
Thomas Coram Foundation for Children: See WP:NOTADVERT (Speedy Deletion Denied for G11. Unambiguous advertising or promotion) 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 23:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 23:59, 12 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Medicine .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:23, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - article warrants a rewrite but not a deletion.  Is a major UK charity.  -- Mervyn ( talk ) 08:15, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I did a quick look and easily found significant coverage in reliable independent sources.  I've done a quick edit and added some independent sources; although the article needs more work, the subject is notable and sources are available.  Regards, BennyOnTheLoose ( talk ) 14:33, 13 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: withdrawn
Chiara Loos: Three of the sources on the article are primary, one is paywalled, and another is a comprehensive article about her; however, this is not enough for me to pass GNG.  Looked at sources online and found nothing much.  Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 01:47, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Germany .  Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 01:47, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 01:52, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep [57] is definitely SIGCOV, [58] maybe.  Searching for her current name "Chiara Bouziane" ( Worldfootball.net profile ) also finds [59] and [60] .  Bouziane easily passes WP:GNG for me.  Robby.is.on ( talk ) 08:29, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:41, 10 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: withdrawn
The Sunday Telegraph (Sydney): Tagged for no references since February 2017.  Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 ( his talk page ) 22:36, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism , News media ,  and Australia .  Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 ( his talk page ) 22:36, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The nominator doesn't seem to have bothered to look for references before nominating the article for deletion.  The Mumbrella website (which covers the Australian media) returns 25 pages of results for a search on this  publication: [19] , for instance, many of which seem usable.  Nick-D ( talk ) 22:55, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Nick-D , I did not seem to find any notable references for that version of the Telegraph.  Pining @ Cunard , to see if he can find additional refs.  Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 ( his talk page ) 08:33, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] As the nominatior of this deletion discussion, I will move the Sunday Telegraph specific controversies already on The Daily Telegraph (Sydney) article, to the article mentioned in this discussion, so I at least have controversies with refs.  Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 ( his talk page ) 08:42, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Nick-D.  Jenks24 ( talk ) 07:41, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I don't understand this AfD.  As much as many refer to the paper as a chip wrapper, it is clearly notable.  Lister needs a WP:TROUT .  TarnishedPath talk 11:42, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] As the nominator of this discussion, I have added these references to the article: Mediaweek (2019-02-08).  "Weekend Newspaper Readership down, Sunday Telegraph is most read" .  Mediaweek .  Retrieved 2023-11-25 .  "Open revolt flares up in Czechoslovakia" .  The Sunday Telegraph .  19 November 1939 .  Retrieved 2023-11-25 – via National Library of Australia.  Christensen, Nic (2013-07-10).  "News Corp Australia increases the cover prices of Sunday tabloids" .  Mumbrella .  Retrieved 2023-11-25 .  Hicks, Robin (26 October 2012).  "Mick Carroll replaces Neil Breen as editor of The Sunday Telegraph" .  Mumbrella .  Retrieved 2023-11-25 .  Aston, Joe (2020-07-28).  "Campion, Joyce forgive The Daily Telegraph" .  The Australian Financial Review .  Nine Entertainment .  Retrieved 2023-11-25 .  "The Daily Telegraph most read newspaper in NSW" .  news.com.au .  1 October 2019 .  Retrieved 25 November 2023 .  "The Sunday Telegraph wins Newspaper of the Year award" .  The Daily Telegraph .  News Limited .  6 November 2011 .  Retrieved 25 November 2023 .  As the nominator, I support a withdrawal of this discussion, per the above references I added.  Yours sincerely, TechGeek105 ( his talk page ) 22:23, 25 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: withdrawn
Interfaculty Committee Agraria: No WP:SIGCOV found on a WP:BEFORE .  WikiOriginal-9 ( talk ) 05:21, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Education , Science , Biology , Europe ,  and Czech Republic .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:50, 13 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: withdrawn
M. J. Rosenberg: Also doesn't seem to pass WP:JOURNALIST : he's not considered a "notable figure" in the Middle East discussion, nor have his works "won significant critical attention" Longhornsg ( talk ) 04:41, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:GNG .  He's quoted as a spokesperson or expert on many articles, in addition to being a writer for publications like The Nation and Al Jazeera , and authoring a book .  I found articles specifically about him in The Jerusalem Post 1 and 2 , The Washington Post , The Forward 1 and 2 , Jewish Telegraphic Agency , Politico , The Huffington Post (op-ed), The New Yorker , National Review , etc.  APK whisper in my ear 05:29, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep for the reasons stated above, although I would also like to comment that some of that information really should just be added to the article.  -- Dynamo128 ( talk ) 08:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- missing information is a reason to add that information, not delete an article.  DRosenbach ( Talk | Contribs ) 11:53, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and United States of America .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 11:55, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawn.  Clear WP:GNG .  Longhornsg ( talk ) 13:31, 25 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: withdrawn
Rocník 21: This is of the "topic is a film that exists, the end" variety, and cites absolutely no reliable source coverage about the film to establish its notability, and it has existed in this state since 2011 without ever seeing a whit of improvement in over a decade -- and while there is an interlang to the Russian Wikipedia (though, strangely for a purportedly German film, none to the German Wikipedia), that article is longer but strictly single-sourced, so that source still wouldn't get this over WP:GNG all by itself.  As I can't read German or Czech, I'm more than willing to withdraw this if somebody with access to German or Czech language resources can actually find the sourcing needed to expand and salvage this, but just existing isn't "inherently" notable enough to exempt it from having to have any sourcing.  Bearcat ( talk ) 19:07, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film , Czech Republic , Germany ,  and Slovakia .  Bearcat ( talk ) 19:07, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Sourced the page with some of the numerous existing sources in various languages, including English, about this classic.  ( Very strong keep ).  - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 01:50, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note to nominator: @ Bearcat : would you mind withdrawing your nomination then?  We would save some time and I could move the page to Ročník 21 .  Thank you very much. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 10:53, 15 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: withdrawn