hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Hindi Hai Hum: — H e m a n t D a b r a l ( 📞 • ✒ ) 04:46, 7 July 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 July 7 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 05:10, 7 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 06:17, 7 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Real_(TV_channel)#Drama : where it's listed, and add a source ( https://www.newindianexpress.com/entertainment/2009/Feb/26/real-tv-channel-to-go-on-air-from-march-2-28746.html or a more detailed one, like https://nettv4u.com/about/hindi/tv-serials/hindi-hai-hum ) - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 09:12, 7 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Per nom and no sources with indepth coverage.  I would not even consider to redirect the page to Real_(TV_channel)#Drama because this page too fails WP:GNG and WP:NCORP with no significant coverage that was up for only one year from 2009 to 2010.  RangersRus ( talk ) 12:04, 7 July 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!  04:39, 14 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect as above: redirects are cheap, and this one is justified by a source.  Chiswick Chap ( talk ) 14:32, 14 July 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
Gotemba Interchange: Rs chen 7754 05:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Japan .  Rs chen 7754 05:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Nothing special about this interchange to warrant an article.  Dough 4872 09:33, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This interchange does not warrant an article.  It is rather amusing to me that this article has even existed for a normal interchange.  Nagol0929 ( talk ) 12:47, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This is a run of the mill interchange with no encyclopedic significance.  Trainsandotherthings ( talk ) 13:09, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  XtraJovial ( talk • contribs ) 13:58, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  There doesn't appear to be anything notable about this particular road feature.  Bensci54 ( talk ) 16:49, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Tōmei Expressway .  The interchange is on the Tōmei Expressway and mentioned in its article.  The AfDd article has been around since 2014!  Hence WP:ATD and WP:CHEAP very much apply and take preference over any delete suggestions.  gidonb ( talk ) 22:55, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Tōmei Expressway : redirects are WP:CHEAP and preserve the page history better.  There is a suitable target and this is therefore a good ATD.  InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs ) 14:42, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
Holy Rosary Academy (Hinunangan, Philippines): Google and Google News turns out no reliable non-directory sources.  GNews Archives shows a 1989 story about a girl who reunited with her family who just happened to attend this school but that's it.  Alternatively , redirect to Hinunangan#Secondary_schools .  -- Lenticel ( talk ) 03:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools ,  and Philippines . Lenticel ( talk ) 03:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and don't redirect . Not a plausible target. HueMan1 ( talk ) 04:02, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Another possibility is to have it redirect to Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Palo , assuming that that article mentions the primary/secondary Catholic schools/parochial schools the archdiocese operates. At present, however, that information isn't in the archdiocese article. So Lenticel's suggestion to have it redirect to Hinunangan#Secondary_schools might be more viable. --- Tito Pao ( talk ) 09:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete without objection to redirecting per nom — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:55, 19 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: redirect
Automaniac: No SIGCOV, only a few passing mentions.  〜 Festucalex • talk 05:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  〜 Festucalex • talk 05:59, 7 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect , to Bill Goldberg .  There are mentions of the show, enough for a sentence in the host's article, but not enough for its own page.  SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 20:12, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, signed, Rosguill talk 00:59, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, D u s t i *Let's talk! * 00:53, 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: redirect
Aussie: This could also be disambiguated, if possible.  48 JCL 20:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions .  48 JCL 20:01, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Australians .  Agree with NOTDICT.  Orange sticker ( talk ) 21:00, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep the term "Aussie" is frequently used and part of Australia culture.  Bduke ( talk ) 22:57, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Popular or not, it must be sufficiently notable .  The references are entirely to dictionaries and there is scant coverage of the term elsewhere in reliable sources.  Wikipedia is not a dictionary .  GhostOfNoMeme 08:11, 19 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Australians per NOTDICT.  That said, there is a clear difference between Kiwi (nickname) and New Zealanders , but this article is nowhere close to that quality.  Doctorhawkes ( talk ) 02:38, 17 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Australians .  Clear case of WP:NOTDICT .  "Aussie" as a term, much like "Brit", doesn't enjoy the same level of coverage that "Kiwi" does.  GhostOfNoMeme 08:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to "Australians."  While it may be possible to write a good encyclopedia article on this or some other word, such an article would cover its history, its origins, its impact beyond Australia.  Blow it up and start over.  Darkfrog24 ( talk ) 18:55, 19 July 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
Charles Crumb: Notable primarily due to his familiel association with Robert Crumb .  Schierbecker ( talk ) 14:07, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Crumb family per the proposal at Talk:Charles Crumb#Merge to new article Crumb family .  Jfire ( talk ) 15:35, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists , Comics and animation ,  and Pennsylvania .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:24, 3 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect as suggested.  Bearian ( talk ) 17:19, 5 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge This could easily be solved by merging this bio into the Crumb Family page.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 14:24, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: This page can not be Merged or Redirect to Crumb family as this page is a Redirect.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:23, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I think the proposal is to create a new article.  It's not a bad idea.  Schierbecker ( talk ) 23:47, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Correct; see the discussion I linked above.  And the person who closes the AfD does not need to be the person who turns Crumb family into an article -- they can add {{ Afd-merge to }} to Charles Crumb and let the community implement the decision.  Jfire ( talk ) 23:55, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I see.  Well, there has to be an existing article to Merge/Redirect to when this discussion gets closed as far as I know.  I might leave this discussion for another closer.  L iz Read!  Talk!  01:26, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Liz , the AFD at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Crumb_family turned a valid listicle into a (bad) redirect.  The previous version at [15] could be restored.  ~ Hydronium ~ Hydroxide ~ (Talk) ~ 02:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting to see if there is a new consensus to revert the action of the 2009 AFD that turned this article into a Redirect to go back to this edit .  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Schierbecker , Jfire , Bearian ,  and Go4thProsper : Ok with restoration of previous version of proposed merge target as a start?  ~ Hydronium ~ Hydroxide ~ (Talk) ~ 08:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Support.  Jfire ( talk ) 15:19, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Fine with this.  Schierbecker ( talk ) 15:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, I agree with these edits and support this version.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 23:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Agreed.  Bearian ( talk ) 16:47, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
Stowmarket Town Council: Lowest-tier local government authority in England, parish councils are rarely notable enough for an article.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 12:29, 7 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics ,  and England .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 12:29, 7 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I've added some secondary sources though I'm not sure if they are enough to qualify.  Crouch, Swale ( talk ) 19:20, 8 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete there's nothing particuarly worth saying about this council.  There doesn't seem to be much information about the award they recieved and it seems similar to those run-of-the-mill industry awards that aren't generally considered notable or pointing towards notability.  ---- D'n'B - t -- 08:31, 10 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] If not notable if could be merged with Stowmarket .  Crouch, Swale ( talk ) 18:29, 14 April 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 ) 18:35, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Stowmarket#Governance as an AtD and where the Council is already mentioned.  Unlikely notability will be established.  A merge would unbalance the Stowmarket article; lists of non-notable past mayor's names and a list of current councillors aren't normally included within articles on the settlement.  Rupples ( talk ) 01:10, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
K35OU-D: In fact, the only time it got mentioned in Tucson's newspapers was in public notices in the classifieds section.  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 19:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Arizona .  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 19:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of over-the-air HSN affiliates : it is listed there, and it seems all known affiliations (as opposed to the unsourced and unspecified "other affiliations") have been HSN or its associated networks, as would be expected for a Ventana Television station.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:13, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of over-the-air HSN affiliates : Subject lacks the needed WP:SIGCOV to meet the WP:GNG .  Redirect as a WP:ATD .  Let'srun ( talk ) 22:16, 10 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
Sometimes It Hurts: I wanted to at least have the discussion about this rejected PROD.  Jax 0677 ( talk ) 00:27, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and California .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:55, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Charting is an indication of notability, but not a guaranteed pass.  I can't find anything discussing this song, tried a Gnewspapers search but nothing came up.  Very early in the internet age, might be covered in paper sources.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:19, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Darkest Days per WP:ATD .  Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 22:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Darkest Days , the parent album.  There is evidence that this song was released as a single and achieved some minor chart placements, but per WP:NSONG there is no further media analysis or coverage of the song in its own right.  Therefore there is nothing with which to build an informative encyclopedic article.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 21:28, 16 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
KNUST Library: 6 of the 7 provided sources are primary.  LibStar ( talk ) 02:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Ghana .  AllyD ( talk ) 05:59, 29 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Hmm.  There are some studies.  [28] [29] Suitskvarts ( talk ) 15:50, 31 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Also "Library Orientation and its Impact on Students' Academic Journey" in Library Philosophy and Practice .  A redirect to Kwame_Nkrumah_University_of_Science_and_Technology#Library_and_digital_resources could be a reasonable outcome here?  AllyD ( talk ) 08:48, 1 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  Necrothesp ( talk ) 10:10, 4 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!  03:27, 5 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 03:29, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
Apache Trafodion: Could only find mentions in scholarly sources.  IgelRM ( talk ) 22:34, 30 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!  23:27, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:03, 31 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : List of Apache Software Foundation projects seems like a better target, if this is to be redirected.  -- asilvering ( talk ) 03:39, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Please, remember we need at least a valid reference in the redirected page to be able to include any entry in it, otherwise this page will redirect to page without any mention to this project.  Mfixerer ( talk ) 08:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of Apache Software Foundation projects .  Source the entry there to [1] , [2] , and [3] .  ~ A412 talk!  19:45, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
Bent But Not Broken: The only review in the article is a Kirkus Indie, which is a pay-for review program that does not demonstrate notability, see WP:KIRKUS .  The only other review I can find is on the NY Journal of Books (Not to be confused with the much more famous NY Review of Books) which seems to be an obscure group blog.  There's a passing mention of the book in this NYtimes article but it's not SIGCOV.  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 00:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Literature and United States of America .  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 00:38, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment At the very least this can be merged to the author as an ATD.  Jclemens ( talk ) 03:40, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not even sure the author is notable honestly.  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 03:55, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The article isn't even tagged for notability, so that's not a compelling reason to not merge content there.  Jclemens ( talk ) 05:47, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm not objecting to the redirect proposal for now, I'm just saying that I think there may be a case for AfDing the author too.  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 05:48, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - non-notable author, and the only source is unreliable at best.  -- TheInsatiableOne ( talk ) 07:34, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Don Cummings .  While I found the same NYT article mentioned by the nom, I agree that it really is not significant coverage of the book itself.  While the author's notability may be questionable, as long as that article is here, redirecting there would be the preferable WP:ATD .  If the author's article is later brought to AFD itself and deleted, then the redirect would be deleted as well at that time.  Rorshacma ( talk ) 18:44, 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!  05:09, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Don Cummings per Rorshacma's decision.  CastJared ( talk ) 08:31, 23 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
Chris Cwej: A search for sources yields little to no results outside of passing mentions and references.  Article currently does not meet GNG or SIGCOV.  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 15:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy ,  and Literature .  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 15:52, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Doctor Who supporting characters Dronebogus ( talk ) 22:15, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete without sources this fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV .  A redirect might be fine.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 22:41, 2 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
Party! Party! Party!: I could not find any significant coverage in secondary sources (including by searching Google and trove), and the one substantive assertion in the article (its creators did not believe in self-government) is unsourced and I was unable to verify it.  Portwalrus ( talk ) 09:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Australia .  Portwalrus ( talk ) 09:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 12:05, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 1989 Australian Capital Territory general election .  Discussed 30 years after the event:  "Provocateur Emile Brunoro registered six parties to contest the poll, including the Sun Ripened Warm Tomato Party, which promised to ban gas-ripened "fake" tomatoes from the ACT. His other parties included Party! Party! Party! and Surprise Party." ( Canberra Times, 6 March 2019 ) Regards, -- Goldsztajn ( talk ) 03:48, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This sounds quite sensible to me - and information could be added to the Political parties and election process citing this source.  Portwalrus ( talk ) 04:50, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete all citations currently used in the article are primary references.  Per the nomination it lacks Sigcov in secondary sources and is therefore not notable.  TarnishedPath talk 10:07, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per Goldsztajn|, because might as well.  Cabrils ( talk ) 06:45, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per above, not notable beyond this single election.  ITBF ( talk ) 12:47, 26 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: redirect