hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Kerala Gazetted Officers' Federation : A google news search found only 3 sources of routine coverage.  Fails WP:ORG and GNG.  LibStar ( talk ) 23:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Kerala .  LibStar ( talk ) 23:25, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , notable organization.  When you say only 3 sources, in which language did you google?  Here are some results, [62] , [63] , [64] , [65] , [66] , [67] , [68] , [69] , [70] , [71] , [72] , [73] , [74] , [75] -- Soman ( talk ) 00:47, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] English.  Most of the sources you found are local and we need wider coverage as per WP:AUD .  I would caution using youtube as a source as per Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources .  LibStar ( talk ) 00:54, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] As I'm sure you are aware, not all news around the world is in English.  The sources here include Mathrubhumi which has a readership of 970,000 daily, Asianet (TV channel) , Kerala Kaumudi , etc.  If you read WP:AUD it literally says " Significant coverage in media with an international, national, or at least regional audience (e.g., the biggest daily newspaper in any US state) is a strong indication of notability."  If Kerala was located in the US, it would be the second-most populous state after California.  -- Soman ( talk ) 01:12, 14 May 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!  23:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 03:22, 28 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: no consensus
List of largest companies in Pakistan : Possibly redirect or delete.  HistoriesUnveiler ( talk ) 11:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC) Blocked sock [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to List of companies of Pakistan as lacking a clear selection criteria.  BrigadierG ( talk ) 13:14, 7 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The topic is significant enough to have a stand-alone article for it.  Sutyarashi ( talk ) 13:08, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Should be improved with more sources.  Afus199620 ( talk ) 15:29, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: "Should be improved with more sources" is true for every article on the project.  I'm more interested in knowing what sources do exist that caused your opinion to Keep, Delete or Merge this article?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge per above.  Fails WP:LISTN .  103.148.128.126 ( talk ) 09:53, 28 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: no consensus
Bader Pretorius : JTtheOG ( talk ) 01:36, 21 April 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 ) 01:36, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep There's this and this along with other coverage in South African and European media.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 08:44, 21 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 ) 04:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Not seeing enough sustained coverage to justify GNG, including in the links above.  JoelleJay ( talk ) 21:35, 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!  06:27, 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, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I am satisfied the subject meets SPORTSPERSON with at least one article which directly details the subject (Rugbyfan22's news24.com source).  The rest, while all routine sports business coverage (rosters, games), supports notability.  This is WAAY more sourcing than most sportspeople I come across in these processes.  BusterD ( talk ) 14:15, 14 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: no consensus
Sigi Wimala : Sciencefish ( talk ) 16:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Women , Beauty pageants , Fashion ,  and Indonesia .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 17:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Fairly meets WP:NACTOR with significant roles in multiple notable films. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 20:07, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk ) 18:09, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above, also id:Sigi_Wimala seems to have some extra sources and content, which might be possible to be used from someone who knows the language.  -- Konstantina07 ( talk ) 18:04, 22 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!  19:54, 23 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: no consensus
Grigori Chernozubov : No reason for this article.  Kingsmasher678 ( talk ) 00:47, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Military ,  and Russia .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:45, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : The page on Russian Wikipedia seems to be more in-depth and has more sources.  Duke of New Gwynedd ( talk | contrib. ) 10:13, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] There is still no notability, and one "brief" biography isn't really enough to build an entire article.  Kingsmasher678 ( talk ) 13:00, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep .  He has a plaque dedicated to him, and streets namead after him, should be expanded with transation from Russian version F.Alexsandr ( talk ) 23:49, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] You seem to speak the language, I will be happy to withdraw the request if you can bring it up to snuff.  Kingsmasher678 ( talk ) 00:24, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per comments above.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 12:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: On the one hand, there is no support for deletion.  On the other hand, the keep argument is not strong.  Let's hear some more thoughts on this before passing a verdict.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  00:49, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I can see multiple Google books refs in Russian.  Mccapra ( talk ) 07:33, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Same as previous relisting comment.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  02:30, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  We simply have no sources .  "Mentions in books," which one sporadically will encounter , amounts to very little; significant references in independent, third-party texts are required .  And the one live link found takes us to a privately curated website.  The Russian lemma is no help, either: It only offers a typical " listing of generals by seniority ."  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
Ju Ju Wilson : Australian search engine trove comes up mainly with small 1 line mentions.  Does not meet WP:ARTIST .  Hardly any articles link to this.  LibStar ( talk ) 23:31, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists , Women ,  and Australia .  LibStar ( talk ) 23:31, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - LibStar, I think there is a possibility that this Indigenous Australian elder artist is notable.  She is in the collection of the National Gallery of Australia (added that info + citation to the article.) We need more than one notable collection to pass NARTIST, but I'm also finding a few hits on her work as a director.  Not ready to ! vote yet without deeper inquiry.  Netherzone ( talk ) 02:21, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions .  Netherzone ( talk ) 02:50, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk ) 02:33, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Also mentioned in this book [15] but it's a snippet view.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the National Gallery of Australia holdings and other sources (and as an author and television appearances).  Randy Kryn ( talk ) 15:59, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Need more discussion over sources.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Elizabeth Young, Lady Kennet : She fails WP:GNG today and is unlikely to garner more substantial coverage in the future due to her being so dead.  JFHJr ( ㊟ ) 05:11, 2 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists , Authors , Women , Poetry , Politics ,  and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 06:19, 2 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - I have added in reviews of two of her publications.  She wrote under the name Elizabeth Young, which makes searching for discussions of her work a challenge.  I suspect there is more coverage of her work, but it requires sifting through articles about similar people.  DaffodilOcean ( talk ) 21:41, 2 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I find reviews for multiple books.  I also added back some of the text that had been removed prior to the AFD nomination.  While this text needs citations (and is now marked as such), it is useful to know in order to find the sources needed.  DaffodilOcean ( talk ) 12:10, 3 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!  07:33, 9 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  06:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] keep as meeting WP:BASIC .   This is not an easy pass -- her books have a relatively low citation count but she has had an impact.   Old London Churches seems to have been regarded as a significant work and has been cited quite a bit in the context of for conservation efforts received a number of reviews which are not available online.   She got obituaries in the Independent  and Telegraph which I think counts for a lot.   Here are the sources I think taken together are sufficient: this book review [33] this obit in the Independent [34] this obituary in the Telegraph [35] minimal discussion about her in her husband's biography [36] this obituary, albeit in a low-circulation paper [37] this entry showing that her papers are now held under supervision of the UK national archives [38] One note: immediately prior to bringing this AfD the nominator removed more than 4K of text from the article including removing her extensive biography.  I'm not sure how that is justified - surely if the books exist they are sources, although whether they count for notability may be another matter.   I wholly agree with @ DaffodilOcean 's decision to reinstate them, and to identify additional cites.  Oblivy ( talk ) 01:22, 17 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: no consensus
Ilyas Vasipov : I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 January 29 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 23:31, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Meets WP:GNG as a person "influenced a whole generation of St. Petersburg journalists" and the publisher of an iconic newspaper.  Evilfreethinker ( talk ) 23:38, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and Russia .  Shellwood ( talk ) 23:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 03:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk ) 06:44, 5 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:57, 12 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: no consensus
Philopoemen Constantinidi : No articlre improvemebt since it was tagged in April - Altenmann >talk 06:37, 9 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists and Greece .  Kpg jhp jm 07:26, 9 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete not notable yet, WP:TOOSOON.  Freinland ( talk ) 07:39, 9 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep notable per collection at Centre Pompidou and Benezit encyclopedic entry.  Article needs improvement Hermann Heilner Giebenrath ( talk ) 10:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment This looks like the article on in Hellenica World The site looks so old, that it might precede the Wikipedia article.  https://copyvios.toolforge.org/? lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Philopoemen+Constantinidi&oldid=&use_engine=0&use_links=0&turnitin=0&action=compare&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hellenicaworld.com%2FGreece%2FPerson%2Fen%2FPhilopoemenConstantinidi.html So sorry.  Hellenica World was copied from Wikipedia and says so.  Looking for a citation for death date.   -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 22:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - still a very ugly article, but I think it now has enough citations for WP:ARTIST .  Very close paraphrasing of parts of Benezit .  -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 02:29, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting, can we please have arguments based in policy and guidelines that focus on whether or not notability can be established? Please be specific and avoid general statements. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L iz Read! Talk! 07:12, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Sorry I wasn't more specific... I agree with Hermann Heilner Giebenrath that being in the collection at Centre Pompidou and Benezit encyclopedic entry establishes notability WP:ARTIST for purposes of being included in Wikipedia. -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 22:28, 16 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: no consensus
Ankur Sharma : No sourcing for GNG or NBIO.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 04:32, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 04:32, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There is a slew of very short or trivial coverage, I don't see a way of constructing WP:BASIC from English language coverage though.  I am not sure if a redirect is sufficient, due to how common the name is, so I'll suggest convert to disambig .  I've created Ankur Sharma (disambiguation) that could be used for this.  — siro χ o 08:44, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Jammu and Kashmir-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:32, 20 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!  04:13, 27 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!  04:10, 3 August 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!  04:43, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep/Redirect (party page) being an Indian I see it at the personal level this person seems notable as he’s founded political party which does have seats being the party president/founder he gets to have an article on the Wikipedia under politics project on wikipedia, but He doesn’t have independent articles as everything in the news for him comes along with his party.  Autograph ( talk ) 07:52, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Also the creator of this article seems highly experienced, also I have added 2 new sources.  Autograph ( talk ) 07:53, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  He hasn't held any political position that would constitute an automatic free pass over WP:NPOL , but the article is not referenced to anything like enough coverage about him to claim that he would pass WP:GNG in lieu of having to pass NPOL.  Bearcat ( talk ) 14:10, 14 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: no consensus
2007 Montgomery mayoral election : Yoblyblob ( Talk ) :) 16:34, 5 April 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 April 5 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 16:58, 5 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Alabama .  Owen× ☎ 17:32, 5 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Non-notable mayoral election (in fact, this is the first I ever heard of it).  TH1980 ( talk ) 01:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per WP:POLOUTCOMES .  I tried several searches and yet found nothing at all.  In the past, we have generally redirected individual non-notable candidates to the election article, and I see no reason why we can't do vice-versa to Bobby Bright .  Bearian ( talk ) 14:29, 10 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!  22:44, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  I'd like to hear more points of view on whether the proposed redirect and its target article are acceptable.  I've never come across an election article being redirected to a candidate's page.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:43, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete only one source and it's an excel file, only a city election, nothing to ATD here.  SportingFlyer T · C 01:02, 20 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I noticed that other mayoral elections in Montgomery have articles, thus I suggest all these articles should be Merged to a new election overview article, Mayoral elections in Montgomery, Alabama .  Possibly something similar to Mayoral elections in Chattanooga, Tennessee or Mayoral elections in Evansville, Indiana ?  Samoht27 ( talk ) 19:56, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes for 2009 and 2011 (those should have been included here), but 2015 feels that it has decent coverage Yoblyblob ( Talk ) :) 13:08, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to a newly-created Mayoral elections in Montgomery, Alabama as that's the general practice for mid-sized American cities.  Elli ( talk | contribs ) 02:24, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist, merge or keep?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Toadette Edit!  05:25, 27 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