hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Generic character (fiction): ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 07:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Literature .  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 07:51, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to stock character as the much more comprehensive and referenced article this duplicates.  Jclemens ( talk ) 08:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to stock character per Jclemens.  CoconutOctopus talk 18:58, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete without WP:SIGCOV .  Looks to be a neologism and an unlikely search term.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 15:20, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It's existed for 19 1/2 years and redirects are cheap.  Jclemens ( talk ) 05:04, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - While the text of the article seems like it is most closely describing a stock character , I cannot find any actual reliable sources that actually uses the term "generic character" to describe either what is being described in this article nor being used as a synonym to a stock character.  That makes this appear to be a non-notable neologism, which would not really be appropriate to use as a redirect.  Rorshacma ( talk ) 16:26, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  I was going to close this as a Redirect but there is an objection so I'm relisting the discussion to see if there is more or less support for that option.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  06:49, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] delete I get lots of hits for this, all of which use it in the obvious sense of talking about various works of fiction (or bodies of such work) as a whole, not about single characters.  And the redirect is plainly wrong: a stock character has a particular but standardized nature, while being generic implies (ironically) a character without character, more or less like the background extras in a crowd scene in film.  I think this is just made up.  Mangoe ( talk ) 13:59, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] delete .  A redirect to stock character would not be appropriate - that is not what the article as currently written describes, and I can find no evidence that "generic character" is used to mean stock character Caeciliusinhorto-public ( talk ) 14:22, 31 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
Pemba (red panda): Groupthink ( talk ) 10:21, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal and Biology .  Groupthink ( talk ) 10:21, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete appears to be a common red panda name [19] .  I was thinking a redirect to the zoo, but there isn't coverage for this animal.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:28, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - fails WP:GNG ; there's also multiple unrelated red pandas named Pemba (as per Oaktree b and this article ).  Sgubaldo ( talk ) 16:53, 21 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
Felipe Leal (influencer): The only attempted claim of notability here is that he exists, which is not automatically enough in and of itself, and the article is referenced entirely to unreliable sources that are not support for notability, with not one bit of reliable source coverage about him shown at all.  As always, Wikipedia is not a free public relations platform, and simply existing as a self-appointed "influencer" is not inherently notable enough to exempt him from having to be referenced properly.  Bearcat ( talk ) 16:37, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Internet ,  and Brazil .  Bearcat ( talk ) 16:37, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails in WP:GNG .  Its also a case of WP:RECENTISM , the influencer is only notable in his bubble of followers.  Svartner ( talk ) 10:14, 6 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Usha S. Kakade: Cited references are paid per WP:NEWSORGINDIA .  Aronitz ( talk ) 13:27, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Maharashtra .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 13:32, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 13:32, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The sources do not deal with the subject in-depth and, as the nominator correctly states, are not independent.  There is mention of some book, but the book was not written by Kakade.  Neither of the awards is such a well-known and significant award or honor that WP:ANYBIO would be met, and the fact that the award was given did not receive meaningful independent coverage, but is carried by promotional outlets—for example: Gravittus Foundation Founder, Usha Kakade felicitated by Defence Minister Rajnath Singh is by "NewsVoir" which is a "Press Release Submission Services in India". — Alalch E. 13:46, 24 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
Safer Internet Day celebration in Nigeria: Suggesting incorporating such content in the nonexistent Safer Internet Day as it got media interest beyond Nigeria only.  Toadette ( Let's discuss together! ) 20:18, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Nigeria .  Toadette ( Let's discuss together! ) 20:18, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:23, 13 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!  19:26, 19 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
Hellspawn (Spawn): In my opinion, a Spawn (franchise) article should be created, but literally nothing from this article is salvageable anyway.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 19:30, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy ,  and Comics and animation .  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 19:30, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Fails WP:GNG without more reliable sources talking about its reception.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 21:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not independently notable.  Fails WP:GNG .  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 22:01, 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: delete
Guarana (energy drink): Admittedly, the name doesn't make searching the easiest, but I haven't found any significant coverage.  ARandomName123 ( talk ) Ping me!  20:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC) Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink , Products ,  and Serbia .  ARandomName123 ( talk ) Ping me!  20:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Per lack of WP:V .  Svartner ( talk ) 09:17, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:SPAM .  In 2024, everyone knows we are not a free web host for businesses to profit from a United States tax-exempt charity .  Bearian ( talk ) 14:30, 17 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
2023 Smederevo explosion: No indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG and also per NotNews.   An explosion of a fuel tank in a residential building.  North8000 ( talk ) 20:52, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Serbia-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:55, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:56, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Only routine news coverage.  Something happening and being covered in the news does not make it notable.  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 20:14, 12 January 2024 (UTC) 4 [ reply ] Delete - Completely irrelevant and not really Wikipedia article.  Боки Write to me!  22:22, 12 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
Sri Gowri Parameswara Temple: — DaxServer ( t · m · e · c ) 18:26, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Nothing to salvage and no clear target for Merge or Redir.  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 02:58, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Intervals of patent nonsense, and sources are not relevant to the article's content.  HarukaAmaranth ( 話 ) 17:52, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : It is an unimportant and unneeded article.  JustAGrook ( talk ) 17:54, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : fails WP:GNG and has not enough WP:SIGCOV .  -- Wesoree ( talk · contribs ) 17:58, 24 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
Chapter Four Uganda: The sources were solely based or more about the founders arrest.  Hence if this is going to be beneficial, I would consider redirecting to Nicholas Opiyo .  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  09:59, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Africa ,  and Uganda .  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  10:00, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:07, 18 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!  06:56, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I want this to be notable.  However it does not seem to me to have a valid claim to notability, and the references, or lack of useful references, confirm this.  Most are about the founder and his arrest, Others are snippets actually about C4U, but are not independent dent, not significant coverage 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 14:38, 30 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
Sonatafy Technology: The London Daily Post link doesn't work, rest are staff directories and an award that doesn't seem notable.  PROMO.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:49, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Nevada .  AllyD ( talk ) 17:11, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom - David Gerard ( talk ) 19:46, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : The London Daily Post ref has a misspelt URL, presumably because the site is blacklisted and edits cannot be saved with the actual name.  AllyD ( talk ) 05:44, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I believe this article was created by a UPE farm account.   There exists a draft, Draft:Sonatafy Technology , that was created by a user ( User:Pegsthais ) who is now blocked as a sockpuppet of a UPE farm.   The London Daily Post, Los Angeles Tribune, and NY Weekly sources might suggest notability, however I'm not sure how reliable they're considered—I'm guessing not very, since none have Wikipedia articles.   In addition to the London Daily Post URL as the user above suggested, I also noticed the NY Weekly URL is misspelled, potentially to also avoid blacklisting or detection otherwise?   Nonetheless, looking over these articles, they read like paid articles rather than genuine journalism.  Uhai ( talk ) 15:52, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , the sources are hot garbage.  Known and blacklisted SEO sources (with the URLs slightly tweaked to avoid the filter), paid placement SEO-friendly sites, Forbes paid council posts, other PR.  The awards are nonsense.  Sam Kuru (talk) 17:27, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : As per submission.  Samuel R Jenkins ( talk ) 05:56, 30 April 2023 (UTC) Blocked sock.  NmWTfs85lXusaybq ( talk ) 03:49, 1 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : An article about a recent IT staffing firm.  The awards listed in previous versions do not appear inherently notable and while searches find articles by the company principal about their operating field, I am not seeing the coverage needed to demonstrate attained notability .  AllyD ( talk ) 07:36, 30 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Not seeing sourcing sufficient to pass GNG/NCORP.  Rupples ( talk ) 03:45, 1 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Adam Kendrick: One is a passing mention and the other is an interview with a family member in the local paper.  I don't believe he meets WP:GNG or WP:NACTOR .  Tacyarg ( talk ) 04:10, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Film , Television , United Kingdom ,  and England .  Tacyarg ( talk ) 04:10, 20 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!  05:20, 27 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
Dendi Suryadi: The subject of the article is not notable enough.  A promotion to Brigadier General is not the ground for notability.  There are no claims of notability other than his promotion and rank.  There are no references that cover him in-depth, the iNews.id is just listing his military service record which does not satisfy notability in my opinion.  Thank you.  ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:28, 4 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions .  ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:30, 4 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:49, 4 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Seems to meet WP:GNG .  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 15:05, 4 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  It seems he is only notable for being the first person Kutai to be promoted as Brigadier General, so basically it's a WP:SINGLEEVENT .  However, I dont think "first person from xxx region to be promoted as flag officer military itself" is really notable, if we accept this criteria then there will other page like this.  Ckfasdf ( talk ) 02:24, 5 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  03:43, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep may pass GNG but reliable sources are not persuasive.  185.104.138.35 ( talk ) 04:52, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ( talk ) 03:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete We are not going to make pages for every single first person from hundreds of Indonesia ethnics becoming a military officer.  That on its own shouldnt make the person notable.  Nyanardsan ( talk ) 03:44, 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: delete
Rectifi: Very little coverage available online DirtyHarry991 ( talk ) 06:44, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Internet .  DirtyHarry991 ( talk ) 06:44, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 12:06, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 07:13, 12 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I'm not seeing much beyond routine listings and passing mentions.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 15:20, 12 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – It does not appear to have any notability Svartner ( talk ) 04:45, 15 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
Marija Žižić: All that came up in my searches were passing mentions ( 1 , 2 , etc.) JTtheOG ( talk ) 03:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Montenegro .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 03:17, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 11:56, 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: delete
Babak Taghvaee: The only substantial coverage is from a local student newspaper, and it's an interview.  The rest of the sources are things he wrote.  Fails WP:RS and WP:GNG .  Juxlos ( talk ) 07:34, 31 May 2023 (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/2023 May 31 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 07:50, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Journalism , Aviation ,  and Iran .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:14, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No significant recognition as a freelance journalist, with limited noteworthy coverage.  The remaining sources primarily consist of the individual's own written work.  Fad Ariff ( talk ) 12:22, 1 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
Jaczemir: Fails WP:NNAME , WP:NOTDICT and WP:GNG .  Has no WP:SIGCOV , as I cannot find any reliable sources outside of dictionaries and databases.  The only person listed is an unnotable fictional character.  AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk ) 06:19, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 10:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , namecruft, not suitable for an encyclopedia.  Geschichte ( talk ) 18:39, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:10, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails WP:NNAME .  Would be better on Wiktionary.  StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 15:03, 19 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: delete