hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Legacy Broadcasting : PROD was declined.  Let'srun ( talk ) 14:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Companies .  Let'srun ( talk ) 14:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , current sources are all press releases - in other sources "Legacy Broadcasting" is just a footnote tag - unable to find more sources on the internet, made difficult by other results coming up name - solidly fails WP:GNG RetroCosmos talk 17:53, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The company's entire existence seems to be solely for regulatory purposes and the stations it ran were designed to be as non-competitive as possible in their markets until a new owner could buy them out under a more friendly FCC regulatory environment.  The company's 'owners' were effectively caretaker managers who also fulfilled the 'minority and women' checkmark to smooth over the FCC until they could sell again, and this business was never a serious effort to establish a competitive broadcaster.  Nate • ( chatter ) 18:38, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: United States of America and Mississippi .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : There's really not much you can say about a company that basically only owns/owned "excess" stations following another company's mergers, so the lack of the requisite significant coverage isn't exactly a surprise.  Mentions of the company in the articles for their stations is sufficient; this never really warranted an article, and very little will be lost with its deletion.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:39, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – per above, and Fails WP:GNG due to mainly press release sources.  TLA (talk) 05:06, 14 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: delete
Mareh Khaneh Kharabeh : No english source, and Tageo is a database.  From WP:GEOLAND : Census tracts, Abadi, and other areas not commonly recognized as a place (such as the area in an irrigation district) are not presumed to be notable.  Hongsy ( talk ) 08:37, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Iran .  Hongsy ( talk ) 08:37, 17 November 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!  07:13, 24 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: delete
Gandhi Inter College : No significant coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL .  LibStar ( talk ) 23:47, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Uttar Pradesh .  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 23:59, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Was this incident of vandalism at the same school?  The district doesn't match, but sometimes districts are split or merged.  "Mahatma Gandhi's statue desecrated in UP college" .  Deccan Herald .  2019-09-13 .  Retrieved 2023-06-22 .  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 00:00, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Jalaun district and Muzaffarnagar district seem to be quite far apart.  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 07:34, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:58, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Couldn't find GNG-level soures for this school.  It doesn't help that its name seems to be shared with a lot of schools in the region.  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 07:38, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting, already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:24, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:GNG .  While you search the college, you will find several generalised links but nothing specific to this institute.  Charsaddian ( talk ) 11:50, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Can't find anything significant on this school from a quick search - Imcdc Contact 02:15, 1 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above and my own search.  Doesn't seem to be anything to work with here.  Redirection to Charthaval#Education is tempting but would raise its own problems as this doesn't seem to actually be the primary topic (as noted, there are a great number of Gandhi Inter Colleges) and a dab page would run into its own complex issues.   -- Visviva ( talk ) 02:36, 1 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Mobile file management : Article has unreliable sources and reads more like an advertisement than an article.  Dawnbails ( talk ) 16:38, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software .  Dawnbails ( talk ) 16:38, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] delete .  I don't see how is it ads, but WP is not a manual, and the subject is not notable for an encyclopedia.  Artem.G ( talk ) 09:39, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] My bad, I wrote that wrong; the citations read more like an advertisement, linking to GroupLogic and some unknown and now-defunct website.  Dawnbails ( talk ) 12:39, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Full with technical inaccuracies and written quite poorly.  No substantial sources either.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TandyTRS80 ( talk • contribs ) 07:11, 5 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: delete
Vishnu Dental College : No secondary sources with significant coverage available.  Fermiboson ( talk ) 07:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools , Science , Medicine ,  and India .  Fermiboson ( talk ) 07:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I can't find any independent coverage of this.  Cortador ( talk ) 09:48, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Also cannot find any independent significant coverage.  Just review sites.  Darcyisverycute ( talk ) 11:41, 3 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] "DONT Delete" I believe that this page meets the notability guidelines for educational institutions,-- Kasyap ( talk ) 09:04, 4 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: delete
Mission 11 July : Other sources are about the actress Nattasha Singh and glamsham.com is questionable.  In my search, I found this , which adds nothing.  Another reliable review can save this film.  Else redirect to Nattasha Singh .  DareshMohan ( talk ) 04:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:24, 4 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I didn’t search hard but what about this ? - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 08:45, 4 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] + this .  Film quoted here and in "The Shifting Terrains of Nationalism and Patriotism in Indian Cinemas" (article published here ) (simple mentions but which indicates it's been noted as a film on terrorism and relates it to a more general trend, which the article can mention).  Not a great source but the film has been called "a debacle of Bollywood debut" for Singh.  All in all there seems to be enough in English only at least to expand the article, verify things, and attest some notability.  For me it's a Keep . - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 19:13, 4 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The NewsBlaze plot summary (not a review) is functionally illiterate and clearly wasn't edited despite being on the main (Australian) NewsBlaze site.  Master's theses are not reliable sources.  Passing mentions do not contribute to notability in any capacity.  JoelleJay ( talk ) 00:53, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No appreciable coverage in RS.  The Indian Express piece is just 7 short sentences of mostly snark, which is hardly SIGCOV.  JoelleJay ( talk ) 00:58, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 06:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete As per above.  killer bee 09:24, 11 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: delete
Battle of Sutlej : Harish Dhillon is a self published source; the author was a headmaster/principal of schools which enrolled middle school children- [65] according to his book's acknowledgements .  The coverage in both aforementioned sources fails Wikipedia's guidelines for significant coverage by a long shot- [66] as they only include a small paragraph about the battle.  Southasianhistorian8 ( talk ) 06:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , History , Military , Sikhism ,  and Punjab .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:16, 18 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!  07:41, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete While the battle happened, there are not enough reliable sources for it to merit its own article.  We can acknowledge the battle by including a sentence in Mughal-Sikh Wars .  Ixudi ( talk ) 20:23, 26 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: delete
Häzel : The closest claim to notability is a Grammy nomination which was for another artists album that he had a hand in writing one song on.  Searching for coverage brings up an interview with him on the PreSonus blog, which is just the subject talking about himself and not significant enough to warrant a Wikipedia article.  InDimensional ( talk ) 20:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Music , France ,  and Brazil .  InDimensional ( talk ) 20:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 21:16, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : A quick search does not bring anything to the table to present as WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV .  Please ping me if sources are found.  I might change my vote -- Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 21:41, 12 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: delete
Obeid Rashid Nizam : Bangladesh Cricket Board is not a legislative body, so WP:NPOL does not apply here.  I was not able to find any sources that establish notability WP:NBIO or WP:GNG — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c ) 15:14, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Businesspeople , Cricket ,  and Bangladesh .  — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c ) 15:14, 18 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: delete
Cullen Collopy : There is some minor coverage, but nothing non-routine.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union ,  and South Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fair bit of coverage, but I'm not sure there is enough to pass WP:GNG here.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 09:13, 14 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: delete
Eugene Kirwan : JTtheOG ( talk ) 05:01, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Antigua and Barbuda .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 05:01, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:25, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 17:31, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Delete - I manage to find these statistics [44] and this passing mentione [45] but not strong to prove notability Epcc12345 ( talk ) 00:22, 12 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: delete
Kristin Hedger : Hedger would not qualify under WP:POLITICIAN .  Only under certain circumstances would a candidate qualify for an article based on their candidacy either as their candidacy has some sort of notability to it (e.g. Lar Daly for his use of the "equal time rule") or are candidates who qualify for reasons independent of their candidacy (e.g. Joe Exotic ).  Hedger as the "youngest to be a statewide candidate for public office anywhere in the United States during the 2006 election cycle," does not reach the level of Daly and her business career does not meet GNG let alone the level of a Joe Exotic, Cynthia Nixon , or another GNG qualifying person who happened to also be a candidate for office.  This will be added to deletion streams for politics, North Dakota, and business among others.  Mpen320 ( talk ) 03:33, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions .  Mpen320 ( talk ) 03:50, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Dakota-related deletion discussions .  Mpen320 ( talk ) 03:50, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions .  Mpen320 ( talk ) 03:50, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Mpen320 ( talk ) 03:50, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete "Young person ran for office, lost and got job."  Just a regular working person at this point, I don't see any further coverage for her.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:21, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This is about all the coverage I can find, could likely be her, but nothing for notability [21] .  Still a ! delete.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:22, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Can't find any sources that pass WP:GNG in article or on Google.  Having never been elected to office, does not pass WP:NPOL .  There is no election article to redirect to.  – Novem Linguae ( talk ) 23:49, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails WP:GNG .  Maliner ( talk ) 09:36, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : fails GNG and NPOL, there's only really two sources in the stub (disregarding the image referenced?) and one is only a passing mention.  Schminnte ( talk • contribs ) 00:10, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete non-notable political candidate.  SportingFlyer T · C 09:48, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Consensus seems clear, but lending further support to an argument for deletion on the grounds discussed above.  — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:54, 28 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: delete
Thomas L. Halkowski : Let'srun ( talk ) 13:33, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Law ,  and Delaware .  Let'srun ( talk ) 13:33, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete for failing WP:GNG as article creator.  Safiel ( talk ) 18:47, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Nominee for a position that he did not get.  No sources about him other than his nomination.  Lamona ( talk ) 02:17, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom fails WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 22:28, 28 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: delete
Sumgayit Technologies Park : There is nothing that indicates that this facility is notable.  One of many articles imported into English Wikipedia by a ring of editors from Azerbaijani Wikipedia who are singularly focused on promoting the government.  Thenightaway ( talk ) 12:29, 4 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Geography ,  and Azerbaijan .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 13:56, 4 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Did a search and I did find this Caliber article - but the article is not long enough to be significant coverage.  Second source used from Trend News Agency likely meets GNG requirements, but still fails to demonstrate WP:SIGCOV for parts of this article unrelated to payment terminals.  Feel free to ping me if more sources are found.  EmeraldRange ( talk / contribs ) 20:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 18:05, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – per nom.  TLA (talk) 06:34, 14 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: delete
2023 Savannah mayoral election : The 2023 election is not WP:N and this article is purely WP:CRYSTALBALL .  This election and quite frankly it seems that elections in years past are not notable either.  The lack of reliable sources and sources overall are a by-product of this.  It is possible that it may become notable in the WP:FUTURE but we have no way of knowing that.  This project does not need an entire article dedicated to a non-noteworthy election.  Grahaml35 ( talk ) 05:07, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:59, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:59, 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: delete
Programme level : Boleyn ( talk ) 14:41, 8 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Engineering-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:47, 8 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music , Radio ,  and Television .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:30, 8 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Coco bb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs ) 14:52, 15 June 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!  07:12, 22 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: delete