hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
The Black Country Local Enterprise Partnership: Does not meet WP:NORG , lacking 'significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" AusLondonder ( talk ) 13:30, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and England .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 13:30, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Economics-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I've listed 5 sources on the article's Talk page out of 424 available Proquest sources.  Under WP:NEXIST , Notability requires only the existence of suitable independent, reliable sources, not their immediate presence or citation in an article.  Editors evaluating notability should consider not only any sources currently named in an article, but also the possibility or existence of notability-indicating sources that are not currently named in the article.  Thus, before proposing or nominating an article for deletion, or offering an opinion based on notability in a deletion discussion, editors are strongly encouraged to attempt to find sources for the subject in question and consider the possibility that sources may still exist even if their search failed to uncover any.  — Grand'mere Eugene ( talk ) 20:42, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep given the availability of sources now demonstrated.  Cordless Larry ( talk ) 18:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting for the further evaluation of sources provided.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 18:08, 3 March 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 ) 18:07, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment — For editors without access to ProQuest entries, I've quoted text from each ProQuest article on Talk:The Black Country Local Enterprise Partnership .  I hesitated to quote those texts in the article citations quote parameters, being unsure of copyright limitations, but editors fact-checking the article can see the quoted texts on the talk page.  — Grand'mere Eugene ( talk ) 19:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  An assessment of sources is also needed.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 02:36, 18 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
Solomon Islands–Spain relations: Most of the interaction is through multilateral forums like the Pacific Islands Forum .  The fact that Álvaro de Mendaña de Neira explored the islands in the 1500s is adequately covered in his article.  Fails GNG.  LibStar ( talk ) 02:00, 27 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Spain ,  and Oceania .  LibStar ( talk ) 02:00, 27 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
Selin Köseoğlu: Kadı Message 12:21, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Turkey .  Kadı Message 12:21, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep :@ Kadı Quoting WP:CREATIVE The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work.  In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series) .  I believe the person satisfies this with two separate works: Price of Passion and İkinci Bahar .  Koseoglu's role is important in both works, and both works have received very significant press coverage.  Gorkem80 ( talk ) 15:38, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:14, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Procedural keep , the nomination does not address the state of the article in any way.  Geschichte ( talk ) 08:31, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Geschichte , I didn't understand what you mean?  Kadı Message 08:27, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I mean that you threw in a boilerplate reason for deletion without tying it to the article in any way.  Geschichte ( talk ) 11:04, 21 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
Babar Ahmed (director): The coverage that exists is mostly very minor.  He isn't notable according to Wikipedia guidelines.  Dravoon ( talk ) 21:51, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Pakistan , England ,  and New York .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:16, 22 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep.  Director of at least two notable films that have received substantial coverage, Amka and the Three Golden Rules and Royal Kill (reviewed in the Washington Post, among other things), he is therefore notable according to Wikipedia:NDIRECTOR : "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards (..)The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews, or of an independent and notable work (for example, a book, film, or television series, but usually not a single episode of a television series)"- My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 14:15, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  pass in WP:DIRECTOR criteria Worldiswide ( talk ) 04:45, 24 October 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
Kent Edunjobi: The sources doesn't seem to be significantly covered and per se , have more of PR and paid writing.  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  09:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Keep : withdrawn by nominator.  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  07:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Actors and filmmakers , Artists ,  and Nigeria .  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  09:46, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Significant awards ( https://thenet.ng/kent-edunjobi-wins-first-amvca-for-anikulapo-soundtrack/ ) - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 14:40, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Mushy Yank , winning a major award remember per WP:ANYBIO doesn't mean the person is notable.  It means likely and the award hasn't be credited multiple times.  My major concern here is the source as much of them are somewhat PR.  — Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  06:51, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep : As pointed out by Mushy Yank, the subject won a major award.  Moreover, he has produced the soundtrack to notable films such as Roti , Citation , A Naija Christmas , and Anikulapo .  Although majority of the sources ( 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 ) discussing the subject aren't independent of him, I feel like the two previous facts stated are enough for a weak keep.  Versace 1608 Wanna Talk ?  21:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : awards mean he passes notability outlined by WP:MUSICBIO InDimensional ( talk ) 11:06, 28 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: keep
Center for Inspired Teaching: I don't see WP:ORG level coverage here.  Much of the sourcing is primary, churnalism and/or not in depth Star Mississippi 00:06, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Education ,  and Washington .  Star Mississippi 00:06, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – this org has been in the news since 1996 (the news link above shows plenty of hits over the years) and won awards in 2022 and 2023.   Sure, it could use work – I just fixed the latest refs which were very poorly done by someone who probably cares about the org but is not experienced with WP referencing.   Let's improve it rather than remove it.  Dicklyon ( talk ) 17:00, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:22, 8 October 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!  00:05, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Dicklyon 's comments above and his work cleaning up the article.  This is a "weak keep" for me - I think notability is still just over the line.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 03:48, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Dicklyon.  There's enough RS coverage here to pass the notability bar .  Sal2100 ( talk ) 20:29, 10 October 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
Anne Philomena O'Brien: Could not find significant coverage.  Only 3 gscholar hits.  LibStar ( talk ) 00:29, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - @ PMCH2 : who created this article in 2021.  The source listed as The Encyclopedia of Women and Leadership in Twentieth-Century Australia is pretty impressive.  Also, scroll down to all the listings in the Authority Control template.  It takes a bit of checking into each returned listing, but there's enough IMO.  — Maile ( talk ) 01:34, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions .  Grahame ( talk ) 07:59, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Authors ,  and Women .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:00, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep I think the listing in the Women and Leadership Encyclopedia is notable.  Could use more sourcing, but it should be ok.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:10, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I added more published book reviews.  There are enough for WP:AUTHOR .  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 07:40, 28 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : reviews of her books in WP:RS indicate notability.  Pam D 08:01, 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: keep
Northside School of Innovation, Technology, and Entrepreneurship: Either Northside Independent School District or Oliver Wendell Holmes High School could be a redirect target, but I don't know which would be preferred.  Walt Yoder ( talk ) 23:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Texas .  Walt Yoder ( talk ) 23:22, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance , Business ,  and Technology .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:45, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and Redirect : Likely notable, redirect to Northside School of Innovation, Technology, and Entrepreneurship as it pass WP:GNG as per WP:BEFORE but current version of article needs huge cleanup.  ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri ( ✍️ ) 23:59, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It has already been moved to Northside School of Innovation, Technology, and Entrepreneurship 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 00:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep- The article is a c-class article, but it is almost entirely unreferenced and will need a complete rewrite.  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 00:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I've Stub-ified it for now.  😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 18:49, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep but SEVERE trimming —This article needs editing down to supported and verifiable information.   ANY Keep action should come with a Major trimming of content.  -- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ceyockey ( talk • contribs ) 01:29, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , looking at the page now, it has been stub-ified.  That should make a lot of the previous ! voters happy.  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish • growths ) 17:28, 30 October 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
Ruben Muradyan (ballet dancer): Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:57, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - appears well sourced/ meets WP:N .  Archives908 ( talk ) 19:23, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Care to elaborate on how it's well sourced?  Can you read Armenian?  Or are you just saying this should be kept based on a cursory glance.  * Pppery * it has begun... 22:32, 25 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 ) 18:49, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Shadow311 ( talk ) 19:07, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep They've won awards before such as the Honored Artist of Armenia , which can constitute under WP:ANYBIO .  Noorullah ( talk ) 00:30, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Is there any evidence that Honored Artist of Armenia qualifies as a well-known and significant award or honor ?  If it truly were one then presumably its article would be more than a tiny stub.  * Pppery * it has begun... 00:33, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It is awarded by the president of Armenia.  One nation bestowing significance through an award seems to fit the definition for WP:ANYBIO in my eyes.  [1] It can also be something seen as of "historic" value now being a historic award, as it seems Armenia possibly does not give out these awards anymore?  [2] @ Pppery Noorullah ( talk ) 03:47, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep several articles are already present on the page such as aysor.am .  Shinadamina ( talk ) 05:40, 30 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: keep
Peat pulp bath: All other sources I could find were trying to sell something.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 14:14, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness , History , Environment ,  and Geography .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 14:57, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : There is scientific evidence on physiological mechanisms and efficacy of peat pulp therapy.  I added two sectios on both topics and provided references. -- Jwdietrich2 ( talk ) 07:22, 23 September 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!  01:43, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - seems to be a topic of discussion by academics in published papers, which is normally considered a strong sign of notability.  JMWt ( talk ) 19:12, 28 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: keep
Clemenger: Laterthanyouthink ( talk ) 06:35, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I have rewritten it, adding 3 entries.  Boleyn ( talk ) 07:35, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Laterthanyouthink , do you think it meets the criteria now?  Thanks, Boleyn ( talk ) 08:11, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Sure - thanks for adding the names.  Makes more sense to keep it now!  Laterthanyouthink ( talk ) 08:12, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : reasonable dab page now.  Pam D 07:31, 13 October 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
Bogdan Khmelnitsky Battalion: ManyAreasExpert ( talk ) 22:47, 4 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military , Russia ,  and Ukraine .  Owen× ☎ 23:22, 4 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The article needs more work about the unit's actions in 2024.  It's lazy to call for a deletion of a page because you don't find sources from a certain year.  On that note, the vast majority of the sources from 2023 in this article are considered reliable.  Salfanto ( talk ) 01:09, 5 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Important unit of the war in Ukraine.  The article is sourced well enough, and the sudject has been covered rather extensively.  And if @ Manyareasexpert didnt delete several news articles covering the battalion, there would be no reason for nomination.  F.Alexsandr ( talk ) 09:38, 5 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Greetings, only unreliable sources were deleted.  Thanks!  ManyAreasExpert ( talk ) 18:36, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Seems notable and important Marcelus ( talk ) 09:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Many RS to establish notability.  FuzzyMagma ( talk ) 12:37, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting per Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2024 May 11 .  This was NAC-closed as "SNOW" early, despite not meeting the general criteria for SNOW.  I encourage the AfD nominator (also the DRV appellant) to reply to some of the 'keep' opinions above, addressing their concerns from a P&G standpoint and discussing SUSTAINED as it may apply here.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 02:11, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Notable unit, enough RS.  Florificapis ( talk ) 02:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Greetings all, thanks for all the votes.  WP:GNG is a complex guide, and all of the criteria of it should be met for the article to meet GNG, including WP:SUSTAINED .  It's not enough for the article to have "good" or "many" RS, the SUSTAINED criteria should be met for the article to exist.  Thanks!  ManyAreasExpert ( talk ) 18:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per GNG and WP:NUNIT , obviously notable, and per above.  RadioactiveBoulevardier ( talk ) 23:43, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] per GNG and WP:NUNIT It doesn't fit WP:SUSTAINED of GNG.  NUNIT covers military units, and if you read article content, all of it is reported "by Russian sources", so it looks more like a media phenomena, not a real military formation.  ManyAreasExpert ( talk ) 20:01, 15 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
Eagle Fortress: tagged for notability issues since the month the article was created.  ltb d l ( talk ) 09:13, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Amusement parks and Korea .  ltb d l ( talk ) 09:13, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Everland .  It's a possible search term, but the article itself isn't worth saving.  The Squirrel Conspiracy ( talk ) 09:29, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong keep I may be a bit biased as someone who does South Korean amusement park stuff, but I genuinely believe this is notable.  The SIGCOV in RS is definitely there but the sources are all in Korean, thus leading to misconceptions that this is not a notable coaster.  A quick search through Naver shows all this coverage: [64] [65] [66] .  Plus older news sources show signs of SIGCOV as well - [67] .  #prodraxis connect 13:12, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep for same reasons that @ Prodraxis provided.  Coverage in the Korean language is easily notable.  toobigtokale ( talk ) 02:22, 28 October 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