hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Atomic Notebook: Fram ( talk ) 07:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or redirect to Zettelkasten , which appears to be a practically identical concept.  It is very difficult to find instances of "atomic notebook" being used in this way, so I am unsure whether a redirect is suitable.  On the other hand, "atomic note" seems to be a more common term.  Helpful Raccoon ( talk ) 08:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Seems like a very unlikely search term for this as well, judging from Google .  It looks like the article is just a way to get traffic to or attention for a company, [17] .  Fram ( talk ) 08:30, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Judging from what I just reverted elsewhere, this is a novel concept created by the article creator1 [18] .  Fram ( talk ) 08:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as WP:NEOLOGISM with no usage in reliable sources.  Leaving aside the neologism in the title, the subject that the article attempts to name and describe is a kind of data model for a personal knowledge base : see Personal knowledge base § Data models , where granularity is the word used for the (degree of the) atomic quality in the neologism " Atomic Notebook ".  If such a data model requires more coverage in Wikipedia, it would be best to begin by expanding that coverage in the article Personal knowledge base .  A notebook is just one metaphor for such a data model; as Helpful Raccoon mentioned above, a card file (in German, Zettelkasten ) is another metaphor for such a data model.  But no matter which metaphor you choose (and here's a long list of such metaphors for example), what you're essentially describing here is a data model for a personal knowledge base.  Biogeographist ( talk ) 21:31, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Atomic Note Taking is a more modern (and more used) term for the concept Zettelkasten, so happy to redirect there instead.  Also not happy with the implication that I'm trying to drive traffic for corporate sponsorship, that was never my intention.  Стиво ( talk ) 11:17, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] There is no reason at all to redirect this, it hasn't received any outside attention and isn't discussed at the target (and shouldn't be included there for the same reason).  Fram ( talk ) 12:06, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I agree that a redirect isn't appropriate.  It needs to be deleted.  Note the lack of any supporting reliable sources for the article creator's claim that it's a widely used term.  Biogeographist ( talk ) 13:19, 24 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
Lipcon, Margulies, and Winkleman: Similar to many articles about lawyers, the problem is that notability for the firm is not inherited from coverage about lawsuits it was a part of, or from quotes about other topics attributed to the firm's lawyers.  ~ A412 talk!  20:42, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law , Companies ,  and Florida .  ~ A412 talk!  20:42, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: as per @A412 .  Just a self-promoting non-notable law firm.  Nirva20 ( talk ) 22:20, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Agree that they fail WP:NCORP and this is really just an article about a law firm doing its expected job.  Editing84 ( talk ) 08:18, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Leaning delete per User:Bearian/Standards#Law_firms .  It has had lots of newsworthy lawsuits, but little about the law firm or its partners .  My essay is not policy, so try to convince me otherwise.  Bearian ( talk ) 20:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Fred Roy Krug: I suggest deletion at this time.  -- Classicwiki ( talk ) If you reply here, please ping me .  19:41, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Film , Television , Switzerland ,  and United States of America .  Classicwiki ( talk ) If you reply here, please ping me .  19:41, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails both WP:GNG and WP:DIRECTOR .  No significant coverage on his projects as a producer nor director, I can't find any reliable sources about them.  Talk:Fred Roy Krug#Proposed additions to article (moved from deletion discussion) are WP:OR and possibly WP:COI .  — Young Forever (talk) 05:58, 25 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
Primitive Catholic: I should point out, while you will find many reliable sources mentioning the phrase "primitive Catholic", all of the ones I've seen are using it to refer to the early Christian Church, not a contemporary movement of "independent Christian congregations", which is what this article purports to be about.  SomethingForDeletion ( talk ) 06:39, 24 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and Christianity .  SomethingForDeletion ( talk ) 06:39, 24 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
Fredrik Zanjanchi: He did score cup goal and was of course signed at one point , but I mean WP:ROUTINE coverage.  Regarding transfer news, we also have a piece about him not being signed .  Match reports from lower level do not constitute significant coverage.  Geschichte ( talk ) 15:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Sweden .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:47, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 12:09, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 12:12, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep – The athlete has 19 appearances for Ögryrte, which is completely professional, in addition to the article on sv.wiki being supported by a satisfactory number of sources.  Svartner ( talk ) 19:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep I am also in agreement with Svartner.  When I had a look at sv:Fredrik_Zanjanchi I feel there might be enough to scrape by.  Regards.  Govvy ( talk ) 19:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I think it's pretty clear that every reference in the Swedish article are WP:PRIMARY , database or WP:ROUTINE .  Geschichte ( talk ) 22:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO.  Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth .  BLPs require strong sourcing.  sv:Fredrik_Zanjanchi sources are database records and WP:PRIMARY , nothing that meets IS SIGCOV.  // Timothy :: talk 16:02, 28 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
Gwalior Glory High School: Best source I can find in my searches was CBSE School , which is not independent and fails to demonstrate any WP:ORGDEPTH .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:47, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools ,  and Madhya Pradesh .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:48, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Courcelles ( talk ) 14:36, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Normal school.  Fails GNG and ORG.  BEFORE showed this is a normal school and has normal school news, nothing that meets IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  // Timothy :: talk 04:14, 19 April 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
Achievement motivation inventory: Starting with WP:NPOV as the article is holding a neutral point of view, becoming incomprehensible, and hanging from a thread.  The article lacks incline citations per WP:IC AND, and it relies on a single source.  There needs to be some sort of conversation about this article because I already WP:PROD it, but unfortunately, it got deleted.  GoodHue291 ( talk ) 17:14, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:54, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I don't personally find every article worth saving.  I've been watching this one for awhile, and questioning the motives by which it was created.  It appears spammy to me.  This is underscored by the fact—per the nom—that the only source seems to be the very individuals who created the test.  — void xor 16:13, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Subject does not meet the WP:GNG due to a lack of WP:SIGCOV .  Let'srun ( talk ) 17:28, 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
Arbër Hebeja: I wasn't able to find any decent coverage in Albanian media so it's hard to see a passing of WP:SPORTBASIC or WP:GNG for Hebeja.  I'm happy to assess sources if anyone finds any good ones.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Albania .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:18, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 13:30, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails in WP:GNG .  Svartner ( talk ) 04:42, 27 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
Samuel Pena: The secondary sources are all fairly WP:ROTM for any local politician and not enough to establish WP:NOTABILITY or significant coverage per WP:POLITICIAN .  Shaws username .  talk .  23:25, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Politicians ,  and California .  Shaws username .  talk .  23:25, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk ) 01:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 20:03, 15 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
Suzanne Arafa: I searched "Suzanne Arafa," "سوزان عرفة," and " سوزان محمد محمود علي عرفة."  Lots of passing mentions, especially during her college career, but nothing substantial.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 05:15, 14 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football , Egypt ,  and Georgia (U.S. state) .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 05:15, 14 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:32, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Agree with the snowman.  Return to draft and look for more sources.  MaskedSinger ( talk ) 11:16, 20 November 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
David Early: The Film Creator ( talk ) 21:35, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions .  The Film Creator ( talk ) 21:35, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails GNG and BIO.  Source in article is an OBIT, and BEFORE are promo, nothing that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth.  // Timothy :: talk 06:04, 23 April 2023 (UTC) // Timothy :: talk 06:04, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:45, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 00:28, 2 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
Marcelle Slabbert: JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby league ,  and South Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:16, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Amature player with minimal coverage.  Mn1548 ( talk ) 13:28, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - can't find any decent coverage Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:57, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Prizren Front: The entire article is about these events and content was directly copy-pasted directly from each of those articles.  There's also some original research going on, as various events during the Kosovo war (presumably occurring in the district of Prizren ) are lumped together and termed "Prizren Front", rather than reliable sources actually using that term and discussing the events as part of a specific theater.  Griboski ( talk ) 03:21, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 14 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 03:32, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Military , Kosovo , Serbia , and Yugoslavia .  Griboski ( talk ) 03:43, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  It's not a good idea to invent fronts.  It has to be discussed in reliable sources.  StephenMacky1 ( talk ) 13:53, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] We shouldn’t delete this article, we should let other editors to use to add on to this article.  The Battle of Vërrin , Battle of Paštrik , Prizren incident (1999) should be used as a start to the article.  Shqiptar1999 ( talk ) 18:29, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete As per nom.  The Prizren Front did not exist and the only remotely related event was the Battle of Paštrik , which the creator copied and pasted content from.  Over 90% of the article is a direct copy and paste from other articles.  Content taken from Battle of Vërrin , which the user who created this page created, uses a single reference that does not meet WP:RS .  What is interesting is that even the infobox for this page was copied and pasted from the Battle of Paštrik page.  ElderZamzam ( talk ) 01:37, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per the noms rationale, and the creator Shqiptar1999 should also be informed that copying content from another page within Wikipedia requires supplementary attribution .  See Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia .  Isaidnoway (talk) 14:14, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per the nominator's reasoning, and as per the rest of the comments above.  I myself couldn't find any source, let alone reliable, that used the term Prizren Front .  Demetrios1993 ( talk ) 02:54, 19 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
Fraser Trebilcock: No WP:SIGCOV found on a WP:BEFORE .  WikiOriginal-9 ( talk ) 02:08, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law , Companies ,  and Michigan .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 02:22, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Per WP:NOTADVERT .  Blatantly created by User:Frasermarketing which was blocked indef May 20, 2014.  For some reason the article was not deleted.  — Maile ( talk ) 02:24, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Fails WP:NCORP based on referencing not meeting WP:ORGCRIT .  I cannot find anything that could be used to establish notability for this firm.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 02:38, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Wouldn't the high ranking make them notable? Panther999 ( talk ) 13:35, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Unfortunately it would not. Same way a company isn't notable for simply being publicly traded or being list on Inc. 5000. -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 19:06, 13 November 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
Paulo Quevedo: Although multiple roles in TV series are mentioned, no references are provided, which makes verifying them difficult, and none of them seems to be significant.  Couldn't find any sources on the web besides celebrity sites and content copied from Wikipedia.  None of the 7 other wikis mention any sources whatsoever.  PRmaster1 ( talk ) 09:50, 4 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Mexico .  PRmaster1 ( talk ) 09:50, 4 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Previously deleted by WP:PROD , ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:04, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No news coverage on Google News — only a blog shows up.  Even if the blog was reliable, Quevedo is only mentioned in passing.  On Search I see his IMDb page and Rotten Tomatoes.  IMDb usually isn't a reliable source , and Rotten Tomatoes won't really help us improve this article.  Besides that I see many unreliable celebrity websites.  With the sources I could find, he does not pass the general notability guidelines , or the general BLP notability guidelines , or the actor notability guidelines .  Capsulecap ( talk • contribs ) 16:02, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I'm afraid I have only found brief mentions, blogs, user-generated content, and celebrity sites without byline, too.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 08:08, 18 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
Bontaqin: I couldn't find sources to show it meets WP:NPLACE / WP:GNG .  Boleyn ( talk ) 16:28, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:32, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] delete Anything whose main source is the Iranian census is immediately suspect but the GNS location in any case is in the middle of a large deserted area.  Mangoe ( talk ) 03:57, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Consensus is clear and well established.  Its got to be legally defined as a settlement, not just a farm or hunting lodge, or field or a locality of something like that.  It is non-notable.  scope_creep Talk 20:21, 18 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