hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Paul Boujenah: doesn't meet WP:GNG .  Password (talk) (contribs) 08:46, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Hello, I don't mean to be rude, but can you please do a better check for this director?  Such as a basic Google books search for example.  And/or see WP:DIRECTOR , Thanks. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 01:11, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] thank you for this.  there are articles that mainly talk about his brother, but have enough coverage of him, so Wikipedia:DIRECTOR looks okay.  withdrawing.  could someone close?  Password (talk) (contribs) 01:33, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Tunisia .  CptViraj ( talk ) 09:14, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:22, 19 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!  07:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment.  Is this actually withdran or not?  Why the relist?  @ User:Liz @ User:Password1233210 -- Ouro ( blah blah ) 13:38, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Probably enough to build an article, [16] , trival coverage but a mention [17] , [18] .  Here's some discussion of a film [ https://www.erudit.org/en/journals/images/1987-n31-32-images1076311/22081ac/abstract/ ] and [19] but it won't open for me.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:40, 26 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: keep
Political positions of Andrew Cuomo: The Andrew Cuomo article is pretty long so I understand the idea of a split.  If this article was expanded significantly I would change to keep.  Esolo5002 ( talk ) 05:03, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law , Politics ,  and New York .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 08:12, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge Short and also largely duplicative.  Split wasn't needed, or at least not done like this.  Reywas92 Talk 14:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , as pointed out by others, Andrew Cuomo is waaay too long already.  This page isn't perfect, but I think we can keep it.  Toadspike [Talk] 17:12, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Toadspike — OwenBlacker (he/him; Talk ) 18:43, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep When I created this page, Cuomo was considered to have a big future in government and politics.  Within a few years, his career was essentially totally over.  I still think there is historic validity to a Political Positions page and it will shorten how much text is on the page, but there is no great strength to the page existing on its own anymore.  PickleG13 ( talk ) 23:22, 29 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!  04:18, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep since the main Andrew Cuomo page could do with being shortened and cut up already.  Duke of New Gwynedd ( talk | contrib. ) 18:46, 4 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: keep
American Polar Society: The article is titled as if it is about a topic.  It's just a list of members without any real context as to why the members are notable or what the purpose of the society is.  Shadow311 ( talk ) 15:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Organizations .  Shadow311 ( talk ) 15:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Travel and tourism , Environment ,  and United States of America .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 16:19, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep ?  I'm not really sure what the procedure is for when the topic has a lot of available material but the article is only minimally present.  I'm pretty sure this article in Polar Record gives the most detail on what the organization actually was for, but of course, that's the one I don't have immediate access to.  Still, the journal published obituaries of people in the field (pdf here ) and the one for APS founder August Howard gives some context.  This biography of Louise Arner Boyd also appears to dedicate a couple of pages to the society and Boyd's interactions with it on page 289+.  Also, I'm not sure if it matters for inclusion standards, but Ohio State University's library maintains a special collection of the society's historical records.  Lubal ( talk ) 18:08, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:17, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : A ton of coverage in Gnewspapers [8] talks about it.  It's described here [9] .  Obituary here about the founder [10] .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – Looked at the sources, there are some indepth content that can be used to expand the article beyond NOTDIRECTORY.  Passes notability guidelines.  Toadette ( Let's discuss together! ) 23:18, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:SOFIXIT .  Geschichte ( talk ) 08:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Needs cleanup, not deletion.  There's enough reliably-sourced coverage here to easily pass WP:SIGCOV .  A. Randomdude0000 ( talk ) 12:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Fighting Antisemitism Together: Cannot find the required in-depth, independent coverage to establish notability * Pppery * it has begun... 22:21, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Canada .  Shellwood ( talk ) 23:09, 15 December 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!  18:57, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : I just added three RS from mainstream news, including what appears to be SIGCOV from the Globe and Mail .  Coupled with the non-local, non-trivial coverage from the Jerusalem Post , I believe this qualifies as notable.  Owen× ☎ 19:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep since with the new sources, FAST seems notable.  Cortador ( talk ) 20:05, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and remove the notability tag.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 14:10, 27 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: keep
Stacy Blake-Beard: Has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, so hopefully we can now resolve it.  Boleyn ( talk ) 13:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:44, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Women , Business ,  and Social science .  Bridget (talk) 10:33, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  In this case we have both well-cited publications ( WP:PROF#C1 ) and in-depth coverage specifically about her in multiple newspaper stories ( WP:GNG ).  The fact that someone tag-bombed this article 14 years ago is not an actual deletion rationale.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 17:43, 3 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep .  I'm not seeing a C1 pass; her Scopus citations look to be right around the average among her coauthors.  However, if she's received enough newspaper coverage for her work that C7 or GNG is met then that's sufficient.  JoelleJay ( talk ) 19:41, 3 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: keep
Porta-bote: DirtyHarry991 ( talk ) 06:30, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Weak keep, this review in a NZ magazine [58] and some discussion in Australia [59] Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:46, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: Subject passes the WP:GNG with the sources provided in this discussion.  Some promotional language stands to be removed but WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP .  User:Let'srun 14:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  If the article weren't so ancient, I'd suggest draftifying.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 10:51, 27 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: keep
Thistle Dew Dessert Theatre: Also I couldn't find any of the first 5 sources online, and 6th source is trivial coverage.  Therefore not notable.  -- unsigned post by EternalNub Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions .  Helping get rid of non-notable articles Keep : I'd like to AGF that the offline sources are legit, in which case there is SIGCOV.  Perhaps an editor with access the relevant archives can verify?  -- D'n'B - t -- 10:42, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I was able to locate one of them, so I'm more confident that the others are legit. -- D'n'B - t -- 17:56, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink and Theatre . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 14:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : "I couldn't find any of the first 5 sources online" is not an acceptable argument for deletion; see WP:PAPERONLY , which says There is no distinction between using online versus offline sources. Restricting editors to using online sources would mean that most of the information in the world would be unavailable to us. Toughpigs ( talk ) 16:06, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete :  Whoa!  According to its website , this is an amateur theatre company with 39 seats performing in a Victorian house.  No stage productions are currently scheduled -- it appears mostly to screen movies.  It serves dessert with its shows (if they ever have any) and supposedly won a non-notable amateur theatre award.   The article notes that a non-notable playwright premiered a non-notable work there.  No one involved in it is asserted to be notable.   Assuming this is all true, why is this an encyclopedic topic?   Its website says that its theatre is available for rental for weddings, parties and classes.   This seems to be an extreme case of a run-of the mill community theatre company.    -- Ssilvers ( talk ) 17:29, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Well, it got coverage in The Los Angeles Times in 1999, and the San Francisco Chronicle in 2008.  Neither of those are local to Sacramento, so apparently it was a bigger deal in the past than it is today.  Toughpigs ( talk ) 21:05, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  As Toughpigs correctly pointed out, sources being offline doesn't matter.  Cortador ( talk ) 20:50, 17 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: keep
Arto Nyberg: The main concern here is that this BLP is completely unreferenced, and the Finnish version of the page doesn't contribute much, too.  However, I may miss something.  MartinPict ( talk ) 14:32, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Journalism , Radio , Television ,  and Finland .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 15:19, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - It's also a bit difficult to separate him from his TV show, which also frustrates searching as there's a lot of false positives along the lines of "So-and-so said something to Arty Nyberg" in Finnish.  But still, there's plenty of coverage about him in all kinds of Finnish papers, even if a lot of it is interviews or profiles you'd expect about a "generic famous person".  I'll look for more when I have the time from other stuff, but here's something to start with: Large profile in Anna (subscription required; only shows a snippet by default): [33] Profile/interview in Seiska : [34] Profile/interview in ET : [35] A thing in Seura : [36] Profiles/interviews in the [Iltalehti]] tabloid: [37] , [38] , [39] Some more in the Ilta-Sanomat tabloid: [40] , [41] , [42] , [43] , [44] , [45] , [46] , [47] , [48] (there's more, but that's a representative sample) Pretty much none of these are great in isolation, but the pure mass and sustained length of coverage gives me pause and I think I'm leaning towards a weak keep at the moment.  - Ljleppan ( talk ) 07:41, 8 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, - 🔥 𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌) 🔥 00:35, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Yleradio, I think is the best option.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:06, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I added some references.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 06:17, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Meets WP:BIO with sources presented above and added by Eastman to the article.  They're reliable enough, with some in-depth IMV.  SBKSPP ( talk ) 05:44, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per my comment above: nothing individually earth shattering, but there's plenty - Ljleppan ( talk ) 07:19, 17 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: keep
Sail Forth: No indication of sufficient sourcing found in my BEFORE Star Mississippi 16:09, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  Star Mississippi 16:09, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep .  NL Eurogamer PC Gamer (though the latter two aren't particularly thorough).  Situation VG/S search also pulls up Gaming Age Softpedia ~ A412 talk!  17:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I wrote a reception section.  ~ A412 talk!  20:28, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep It's hindered by some gaming sites not giving actual scores in their reviews anymore, but besides the Metacritic-listed Nintendo Life one, there's a PC Gamer review and a Eurogamer review.  That's in addition to the earlier mentioned Softpedia one.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 17:58, 13 January 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!  20:56, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong keep .  See Talk:Sail Forth .  TWOrantula TM ( enter the web ) 22:29, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – Per TWOrantula .  Sources properly presented on the talk page.  Svartner ( talk ) 02:30, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Mick Sweda: But then a single-purpose account, likely Sweda himself, popped up to remove the redirect without an explanation and restore the article -- FMSky ( talk ) 21:57, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Mbdfar (although he did say Weak keep) and WP:HEY .  I found three secondary reliable sources to back up most of what was already in the article, one of which goes into much detail about the subject or his family.  I also added new sourced information that wasn't there previously, and made things more wiki-friendly.  Note that there are many sources mentioning the subject as part of BulletBoys, but those are mostly passing mentions and therefore not really useful for a biography.  But I think much of what is included now would not fit well in either of the band articles.  Stony Brook babble 22:45, 15 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I acknowledge your efforts to improve the article, but I think it's telling that you were able to find only one source that talks about any of Sweda's works outside of BulletBoys and King Kobra, and that was in his hometown newspaper (Merced).  Perhaps not enough to qualify for "significant" coverage at WP:SIGCOV , but I will accept the consensus of others in this discussion.  Also, the fact that he has a wife and son is not particularly encyclopedic even though a newspaper said it.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 14:47, 19 June 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!  07:16, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to the band per above - doesn't seem to pass GNG on his own.  SportingFlyer T · C 11:36, 22 June 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!  06:28, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per both WP:MUSICBIO.6 and the sourcing improvements made since listing.  Probably still needs another edit pass but a merge would probably not improve the state of the encyclopedia as a whole.  — siro χ o 07:58, 29 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: keep
War Galoh: JoeNMLC ( talk ) 20:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdrawn by nominator - I added a reference for this Somalia populated place.  JoeNMLC ( talk ) 10:49, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Somalia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:22, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - A location does not require significant coverage in order to be notable.  WP:NGEO says " Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable, even if their population is very low."  Millows ( talk ) 00:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment -- basically what Millows said. But even so there are very few sources for this place. It clearly exists, though. Central and Adams ( talk ) 01:29, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per NGEO. The name and coords line up in this book from 1987 and Google image clearly shows it's occupied. https://www.google.com/books/edition/Gazetteer_of_Somalia/CKQ7AQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=War+Galoh&pg=PA489&printsec=frontcover Graywalls ( talk ) 03:10, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- per Graywalls .  Central and Adams ( talk ) 03:26, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment -- Yesterday I found a website ( War Galoh, Geographic.org, Geographical Names ) and added to article.  So above, Withdrawn.  JoeNMLC ( talk ) 10:52, 27 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: keep
Nedunkerny: Dan arndt ( talk ) 14:10, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions .  Dan arndt ( talk ) 14:10, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : WP:PLACEOUTCOMES is an essay, not a governing policy.  The governing policy is WP:GEOLAND , which states, Populated, legally recognized places are typically presumed to be notable .  This article meets WP:GEOLAND.  Owen× ☎ 15:12, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - WP:PLACEOUTCOMES is an essay.  WP:GEOLAND is the policy covering notability of settlements.  Nedunkerny satisfies the very first criteria under WP:GEOLAND i.e. it is populated and legally recognised.  The town is divided into two Village Officer Divisions (Nedunkerny North and Nedunkerny South), the fourth level administrative division in Sri Lanka.  The Department of Census and Statistics collects census data at the village officer division level.  Nedunkerny is the headquarters of the Vavuniya North DS Division , the third level administrative division in Sri Lanka.  Sri Lanka Post allocates a post code to Nedunkerny. -- Obi2canibe ( talk) 15:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Has presumed notability under WP:GEOLAND .  Has shops and an army check point per Google Streetview in 2022.  Mentioned in numerous books listed on Google Books about the Sri Lankan Civil War and looks like there's ongoing religious conflict.  [12] Note the different name spellings.  Rupples ( talk ) 16:23, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above and WP:GEOLAND .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 01:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep nomination seems mistaken, clearly notable.  SportingFlyer T · C 23:03, 29 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: keep