hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Cornell Capital: Drmies ( talk ) 14:47, 7 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:09, 7 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:09, 7 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:09, 7 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , coverage is trivial or inherited from the companies that the subject has acquired.  SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 09:36, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 15:00, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Gnews only sends back PR items, nothing for the company otherwise.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:31, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Damilola Adeparusi: TheLongTone ( talk ) 12:34, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Wanting to set a record is perhaps notable after you actually do it.  There is no coverage of this individual, chef or otherwise.  Appears PROMO.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 12:53, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I mean there is coverage [9] in a RS, but it's a "get to know the person" article, very much celebrity fluff.  Coverage is all similar.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 12:55, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I was thinking WP:BLP1E before I did my source search.  I found sources covering the original record attempt, plans for a second record attempt, and articles about needing bodyguards, so a bit more multi-dimensional of a person than I was expecting.  But sadly these news articles seem quite WP:ROUTINE .  They are lacking depth.  For this reason I do not think she is currently notable.  – Novem Linguae ( talk ) 13:08, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Nigeria .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 13:43, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - this is not the Wiki Book of World Records.  Hilda Baci is notable for other ventures; this chef attempting to break her record is not.  ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 16:30, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete this one actually made me chuckle.  Doesn't even get near notability.  Nswix ( talk ) 02:09, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Clear WP:BLP1E / WP:BIO1E .  I don't see coverage of this individual outside of the context of that single event, so a standalone biographical entry is advised against.  And, that event is non-notable , so I don't see any good place to redirect this to or merge this with.  For those reasons, deletion is warranted.  — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 04:49, 22 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
Ben Bodé: Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG .  - UtherSRG (talk) 15:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Actors and filmmakers , United States of America ,  and California .  UtherSRG (talk) 15:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Zero hits for this actor in any source.  I'm amazed it's been around this long in wiki.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:48, 22 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
T. V. Mohandas Pai: The subject fails WP:GNG and WP:N .  The sources are also promotional or unreliable.  Ratnahastin ( talk ) 05:51, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India .  Shellwood ( talk ) 09:13, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Karnataka-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:46, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Some of those sources may have looked reliable years ago but now we know they were only publishing paid articles.  Azuredivay ( talk ) 04:36, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Some Bare URL link sources and others are poor to unreliable and has no significant coverage to pass WP:BIO .  Page is WP:PROMO on living person.  Nothing notable here.  RangersRus ( talk ) 12:16, 1 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
Se-lib: BrigadierG ( talk ) 19:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  BrigadierG ( talk ) 19:06, 5 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Can you please explain further?   What do you mean by secondary coverage?   Can you give an example?  Mudcap ( talk ) 21:19, 6 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Essentially, all 5 criterion set out at WP:GNG - significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject.  For software in particular, there's discussion of the most likely forms that would take at WP:NSOFTWARE .  BrigadierG ( talk ) 21:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:SECONDARY explains secondary sources.  Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 21:54, 6 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Have added references from additional sources independent of the subject.   Included explanations that the library was funded for development, is used regularly in the classroom in multiple classes, on research projects, and is the subject professional training venues.   I could add more instances.  These should all qualify.  Thank you for the improvement suggestions.  Mudcap ( talk ) 02:09, 7 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Unfortunately, none of the sources in the article seem to be independent.  For example, this tutorial was taught by a lead developer of the library.  Coverage from the organization funding the project is not independent either.  Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 06:42, 7 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes it was taught be a developer, but the tutorial was sponsored by the independent International Council of Systems Engineers, San Diego Chapter.  They decided to run the tutorial for the sake of its members, spend resources for it, and it is the listed on their website.   Doesn't that qualify as independent?   Thanks.  Mudcap ( talk ) 19:10, 7 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Unfortunately not - WP:IIS BrigadierG ( talk ) 19:52, 7 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!  21:49, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Any of the sources used aren't reliable or are passing mentions; I don't find anything extra about this software package, other than where to download it.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 22:22, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom Okmrman ( talk ) 03:52, 13 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: delete
W36EX-D: Fails WP:GNG .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 01:09, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Illinois .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 01:09, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: [ [35] ] is the best I could fine.  Not enough to meet WP:GNG .  Let'srun ( talk ) 19:45, 13 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : We've tightened our notability standards over the years (especially since 2021 , at least in this topic area), and it's hard to imagine a small religious station, even if it has been around since around 1995, getting the sufficient significant coverage needed (and the only coverage under this call sign indicates the only other potential future for a page at this title is a redirect to NewsNet , but I think that would be premature for now ).  (It has a license in the class A television service , implying some local programming is—or at least was—supposed to exist, but Wikipedia requires verifiable evidence of that.)  Note that this station used to be W50CH-D (and, in the analog days, just W50CH) before the FCC eliminated television channels above 36 a few years back; based on searches, it appears the only coverage of this station on Stltoday , the website of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch , are some passing mentions of the channel change that could not possibly be construed as significant coverage of the station itself.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 03:30, 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: delete
Archibus: Sources in article are non-reliable (self-published) or press releases .  Potential sources are similar press releases and are also not reliable, and thus don't indicate notability; others are simply not WP:RS .  Article currently seems to serve as a advertisement of the company's services ("made a strategic growth investment", product catalogue).  Searches for other sources are only of one-word passing mentions (such as "software like Archibus, <other product 2>, <product 3>, etc.") and do not contain any significant coverage .  WhoAteMyButter ( 🏔️ talk │ ❄️ contribs ) 04:59, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business , Companies ,  and Products .  WhoAteMyButter ( 🏔️ talk │ ❄️ contribs ) 04:59, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:13, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails to meet the basic criteria for GNG, not sufficient sourcing Old-AgedKid ( talk ) 13:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Can't find a source with significant coverage that is not PR.  popo dameron ⁠ talk 17:00, 1 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
Nicola Rosenblum: Fails WP:GNG .  Uhooep ( talk ) 07:07, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Bilateral relations , Brunei ,  and Australia .  ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 08:10, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I don't find anything beyond press releases or her appearances at various events, not meeting notability requirements.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:22, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:BIO .  Ambassadors are not inherently notable.  LibStar ( talk ) 03:14, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I ran searches against Aussie newspapers and got nothing.  This is clearly an accomplished government employee who has held significant posts (of which Ambassador is not the only one).  Google returns a number of documents but they are all interviews or articles about her by the agencies that employed her, so not independent.   I'll check back in case someone with better access to Oz sources finds something.  Lamona ( talk ) 15:59, 26 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: delete
List of programs broadcast by TV Azteca networks: Article is a giant list of programs "formerly and currently, and soon to be broadcast".  Most of it is either unsourced or wikilinked to other articles that have info on the show but nothing about it being broadcast on TV Azteca.  Most entries have no context or information.  The few notable original programs are mentioned on whatever particular channel they were created for, nothing to merge.  // Timothy :: talk 05:26, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Lists ,  and Mexico .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 07:09, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Once again, a large list only sourced by four articles altogether which is more complicated to navigate than a Mexico City Metro map, along with complete falsehoods like The Twilight Zone and Alfred Hitchcock Presents being distributed by Disney, with the latter broadcast on CBS, along with The Good Doctor (which is actually a Sony production).  WP:TNT it.  Nate • ( chatter ) 17:23, 23 January 2024 (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 11:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as unreliable.  If anyone wants to recreate a properly-sourced and verifiable list, great.  Mccapra ( talk ) 00:52, 14 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
Karthik Naralasetty: I was going to PROD this article until I found that it not only has been PROD'd but has had two previous AFDs, one closed as Delete, the second as No consensus.  The article on his company, SocialBlood was Soft Deleted after Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Socialblood .  I thought it was time to reexamine this article and consider whether it meets the stricter standards of today's Wikipedia.  L iz Read!  Talk!  01:12, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and India .  L iz Read!  Talk!  01:12, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The 30 under 30 description is here [48] , that's about the best one find.  We don't consider them as a RS. I don't see anything else we could use.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:17, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Andhra Pradesh ,  and New Jersey .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and salt Not notable yet.  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 02:33, 14 March 2024 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Weak keep – No need to salt for sure.  Forbes India appears to be written by a staff, but the publication as a whole doesn't have the strongest reputation?  There's also some coverage from the Business Journals and Dawn I found – they include interviews but there is just enough that is useful.  Also some information from Entrepreneur .  TLA tlak 13:38, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  04:21, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Struggles for WP:GNG and isn't helped with WP:SPIP GoggleGoose ( talk ) 12:35, 21 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
Joel McGregor: zoglophie •talk• 19:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and England .  zoglophie •talk• 19:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete until he makes his league debut, which is relatively standard practice for young players on the cusp of first-team minutes.  Anwegmann ( talk ) 02:07, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:24, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify – As WP:AtD , but deleting seems reasonable too.  Svartner ( talk ) 14:19, 1 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
Pestom sagar: Chaotıċ Enby ( t · c ) 19:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions .  Chaotıċ Enby ( t · c ) 19:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:39, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : should obviously be moved if kept.  Queen of Hearts ❤️ (she/they 🎄 🏳️‍⚧️) 23:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Queen of Hearts : moved where?  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 20:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] MicrobiologyMarcus , Pestom Sagar .  Queen of Hearts ❤️ (she/they 🎄 🏳️‍⚧️) 20:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Ahh, of course.  The simplest answers are the most elusive.  Thanks, microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 20:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  More participation here would be welcome.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  18:18, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Agree with nom.  I'm just getting real estate listings when searching - nothing that motivates a really deep source check.  -- asilvering ( talk ) 02:56, 7 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
Muhammed Mu’azu Mukaddas: I'm not sure it meets WP:GNG however.  Os ari us 15:03, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  Os ari us 15:03, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Nigeria-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 15:10, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This article has a reliable source I improve the references.  Ogoos11 ( talk ) 16:44, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There is not promotion Muhammed mu'azu Mukaddas is the executive secretary of kadsema and the Chief executive officer Ogoos11 ( talk ) 16:47, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That doesn't help the PROMO aspect.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:29, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  As per nomination, the article is indeed very promotional.  His regional position as Executive Secretary at Kaduna State is not enough per se.  As government official, these rules apply WP:POLITICIAN and a major local political figure should have received significant press coverage.  "Significant press coverage" includes in depth, independent and multiple news articles by journalists, something that is not totally guaranteed in the current or other sources found online.  There is a sense of PR in almost all references.  WP:GNG , WP:ANYBIO cannot be validated.  Chiserc ( talk ) 17:34, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] "keep" the article has a reliable source is notable he is the executive secretary of Kaduna state.  Ogoos11 ( talk ) 14:34, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:10, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, D u s t i *Let's talk! * 10:10, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete all sources I find are him talking to the public about various things, nothing focused on him.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:30, 25 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
Maha Abouelenein: The subject appears to be a consultancy influence type who has received no coverage in reliable sources.  Wikipedia is not intended to be a platform to promote subjects or make them notable.  Thenightaway ( talk ) 11:05, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Women , Egypt ,  and Minnesota .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:22, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  Kablammo ( talk ) 13:16, 17 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
Afarin Kids TV: Searching for the channel online in both the Latin and Arabic scripts did not return any usable sources.  signed, Rosguill talk 18:39, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Iraq , Syria ,  and Turkey .  signed, Rosguill talk 18:39, 10 January 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 ) 19:30, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Aintabli ( talk ) 04:49, 21 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