hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Chris Sainty: Appears to fail WP:GNG .  Uhooep ( talk ) 00:24, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Portugal-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:37, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Bilateral relations .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:48, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete gets routine coverage as a government representative but nothing indepth to meet WP:BIO .  LibStar ( talk ) 01:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] KEEP .  I have added a para, which I hope establishes some level of notability.  Roundtheworld ( talk ) 11:59, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] KEEP .  I agree with @ Roundtheworld this diplomat is quite well know, the article should remain open.  Diogo Costa ( talk ) 12:02, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Being "quite well known" is not a notability criterion.  LibStar ( talk ) 12:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting to get an assessment on recent contributions to the article Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  01:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  05:43, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final Relist Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Wordsmith Talk to me 17:50, 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: no consensus
Welspun Corp: MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:48, 2 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:44, 2 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:45, 2 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:45, 2 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep A WP:LISTED company with >$1 billion revenue (pre-Covid).  Companies operating at such scale will almost always get in-depth analyst coverage from brokerage houses/institutions [44] [45] [46] and sustained media coverage through the years [47] [48] [49] [50] [51] .  The fact that Welspun Corp's JV in Saudi is listed on Tadawul [52] adds to its notability.  I'll try to clean up the article when I get the chance.  Maduant ( talk ) 08:32, 8 April 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!  03:00, 9 April 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!  04:58, 16 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: no consensus
Isha Malviya: Single significant role in Udaariyaan .  Does not meet WP:SIGCOV and WP:N .  Editingmylove ( talk ) 02:08, 24 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Women , Beauty pageants , Fashion ,  and Madhya Pradesh .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:31, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : At least one significant award won and 3 significant award nominations have her meet WP:ANYBIO imv.  - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 10:23, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - Eye raising nomination, but that aside, I think this is close.  There is a lot of fancruft references, interviews, general announcements, WP:NEWSORGINDIA , etc.  And, winning an award or appearing on a television show does not give inherent notability (I think the Indian Telly Awards individual categories may not meet notability either).  However, there are at least two references that are bylined and not just routine announcements here and here .  I'll reserve a ! vote at the moment in hopes someone can point out coverage that isn't routine.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 19:09, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] weak delete : most coverage is about the TV show Big Boss [25] , I wouldn't call it extensive coverage. This is a RS, but what's used in the article are all marginal reliability sources per Cite Highlighter, so I'm not sure we have enough to keep the article. Oaktree b ( talk ) 22:46, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The user who has nominated the page for deletion is a new account created solely to ensure the page is deleted. The previous two nominations have also been a result of fandom war. As for the notability, it has been established the last 2 times as well. She has done 2 lead roles, one major reality show, numerous music videos, a web series in post production, notable award nominations and wins. [FYI, Indian Telly Awards and Indian Television Academy Awards are two of the most notable ITV Awards regardless of whether the pages are well updated on Wikipedia or not.] The actress has sufficient coverage, apart from all her work and has more on the way. Hasty deletion to fulfill online fan wars makes no sense. Also note for closers, you have !voted from IP with only three other edits on Wikipedia. -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 17:32, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 24 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: no consensus
Shirzad Abdullayev: Redivy ( talk ) 00:06, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Politicians .  Redivy ( talk ) 00:06, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Azerbaijan-related deletion discussions .  Curbon7 ( talk ) 01:11, 1 February 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 ) 02:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 04:56, 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: no consensus
Hafnia Chamber Orchestra: Newhaven lad ( talk ) 18:50, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Denmark .  Shellwood ( talk ) 18:56, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  There is sufficient sourcing in the article, though if there are no references past 2012, the tense of the article can simply be changed from "is" to "was".  desmay ( talk ) 19:14, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Has gone on international tour so satisfies WP:NMUSIC .  ThreeBootsInABucket ( talk ) 21:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .   There is little additional sourcing that I could find beyond what is already in the article.   Danish newspaper archives should have more sources, especially if it's been defunct for a decade but that needs better search techniques (and/or better Danish) than I have to identify them.  Eluchil404 ( talk ) 00:34, 19 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!  19:21, 19 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!  22:06, 26 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: no consensus
Halal Development Corporation: The organization, although potentially important in its niche, does not have significant coverage in independent, reliable sources that would justify its existence as a standalone Wikipedia article.  The references provided within the article are few in number and insufficient to establish notability.  The majority of the citations stem from the organization's own materials or affiliated promotional sources, which do not adhere to Wikipedia's requirement for neutral, third-party coverage.  The scarcity of verifiable, independent sources raises concerns about the organization's impact and relevance in the broader context.  Lulakayd ( talk ) 13:15, 8 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Malaysia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:17, 8 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:51, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Question : you haven't mentioned this in the nom; did you search for other sources including local sources?  Jack4576 ( talk ) 14:53, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:42, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:59, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Halal Development Corporation Berhad (HDC) plays a pivotal role as a government-backed institution and attempts to become a global Halal hub.  However, even with its expansion of services globally and partnerships for Halal industry development in other countries, the general notability and sources are in question.  -- BoraVoro ( talk ) 11:21, 2 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: no consensus
List of CBS Sports college basketball commentators: Just another case of WP:INDISCRIMINATE WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list fit for Fandom but is it encyclopaedic for here?  The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN .  Additionally WP:NOTDATABASE and WP:ROUTINE .  As with sources per WP:RS , 506sports is a forum and collegehoopsnet is merely an announcment of a list of commentators, the other is a blogspot post; neither doing anything to establish notability.  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 23:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists of people , Television , Basketball ,  and United States of America .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 23:04, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Trim and Merge to College Basketball on CBS Sports#Commentators with only the most notable announcers on that list.  This list does not meet WP:LISTN for this wiki, but for the fandom wiki, it's fine.  Conyo14 ( talk ) 04:53, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Sources such as newspaper articles dating as far back as the early 1980s can easily be found and later added over a relatively short matter of time with the aid of Google News Archives as well as places like Awful Announcing for more "current" or up to date sources.  There's also presumably, official press releases from CBS Sports itself.  I would estimate, that sources can be filled up in roughly a day and a half.  Also, who would fall under the criteria of being "the most notable announcers" among this particular list?  Are we only referring to current announcers for CBS as of 2024, are we referring to announcers who only worked the March Madness tournament?  BornonJune8 ( talk ) 10:46, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:ROUTINE applies.  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 12:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and improve: There are secondary sources discussing these announcers as a group particularly for March Madness, as seen with [ [21] ], [ [22] ], [ [23] ], [ [24] and [ [25] ] being found relatively quickly.  I wouldn't oppose possibly reducing this to just the March Madness crews but sourcing does appear to show that the WP:LISTN is met.  Again, this isn't a broadcasters schedule so I'm not sure how this is a WP:NOTTVGUIDE and I'm unsure which part of NOTDATABASE the nom thinks this violates.  Let'srun ( talk ) 13:57, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Sandstein 07:43, 19 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  07:22, 27 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: no consensus
The Venery of Samantha Bird: Maybe the specific guideline is WP:NOTNEWS , but I've seen most unaired television/film articles that do not have extensive coverage beyond cancellation be draftified, so maybe draftifying is the best option?  I'm open to other options, though.  Spinixster (trout me!) 09:16, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and United States of America .  Spinixster (trout me!) 09:16, 27 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!  07:52, 3 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Passes GNG from sources showing in the footnotes — multiple instances of published, significant coverage about the subject in sources of presumed reliability.  Carrite ( talk ) 15:43, 7 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yeah, but it's all routine press coverage, no sources show that the cancelled series is notable after its cancellation.  Not all cancelled series/films with routine press coverage are notable, and if it is, might as well make pages for the 200+ series and films that have been cancelled.  Spinixster (trout me!) 00:43, 8 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  09:30, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : coverage seems sufficient to have a page (with notable cast, production history, premise verified).  If really there's no consensus about that being enough, then redirect to Starz and add a line there with a few of the sources from this article (but I think it's not necessary and personally find it would be a pity).  - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 00:04, 11 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: no consensus
Mai Whelan : Whelan's other personal details in the coverage are not the reason she is notable and themselves would not give rise to an article.  (2) My view is that there is no content on this page that could not be better subject to a WP:MERGE on the page Squid Game: The Challenge .  Even if Whelan is deemed notable due to the coverage of her appearance on the show, the four sentences about her, if the sum of information known about her, is hardly information that isn't simple to cover on the article for the one thing she primarily inherits her potential notability from.  As ever, open to views!  ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk ) 22:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk ) 22:02, 3 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Vietnam ,  and United States of America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:16, 3 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : We probably have enough for notability based on the game show win.  [27] is also another source.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:08, 5 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : BLP1E, fails GNG and NBIO.  Winning a game show does not make a subject notable, there is no indication this one event was notable, or that anything else related to the subject would meet GNG or NBIO.  // Timothy :: talk 08:23, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  07:30, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , textbook case of BLP1E, and the relevant event is not such as to confer any kind of lasting notability.  -- C avarrone 15:42, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : I wouldn't say that every winner will be notable but certainly the winner of the inaugural season of a very famous competition.  Given the extensive coverage of her win and the controversy surrounding her allegations (later taken back) that Netflix was delaying the payment, I think the subject fulfills the criteria for inclusion.  YerkaIlson ( talk ) 07:21, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  19:55, 18 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: no consensus
Aleph Zadik Aleph : Fails WP:NORG .  Existing sources are not independent, and a WP:BEFORE does not turn up anything that would establish notability.  Longhornsg ( talk ) 22:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Judaism-related deletion discussions .  Longhornsg ( talk ) 22:54, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Nebraska .  Shellwood ( talk ) 23:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Fraternities and sororities-related deletion discussions .  Jax MN ( talk ) 00:52, 12 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oppose - These middle- and high-school organizations are items of independent searches, and with a century-old history and breadth of chapters Aleph Zadik Aleph is clearly notable.   A far more helpful addition would be to find a few additional sources, rather than offering a potshot AfD.   Merging would only make the group more difficult to find, as youth may not have awareness that AZA is subordinate to BBYO or know to look for the analogous girls' organization.   They'd more likely give up, making Wikipedia less useful.   And if virtually all the content is maintained in a merge?   I don't know that anything is gained.   They remain notable, and stand on their own right.  Jax MN ( talk ) 23:05, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note, this is a response to the second AfD.   A previous effort was closed without deletion.  Jax MN ( talk ) 00:57, 12 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This isn't a "potshot AfD".  Please AGF.  Notability is established via RS.  Can you find and share any?  Longhornsg ( talk ) 23:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep : procedural request as this should be a merge discussion, rather than an AfD.  Rublamb ( talk ) 22:20, 12 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: no consensus
Jeremy Fragrance : Show me a secondary source and not only will I change my position that this so-called entrepreneur fails WP:GNG I will eat my own socks live on YouTube.  Expressive101 ( talk ) 10:04, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Internet ,  and Germany .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:10, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] GQ did a piece on him just a few months ago.  Must be somewhat notable: https://www.gq.com/story/jeremy-fragrance-tiktok-interview Griseo veritas ( talk ) 10:14, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Interviews aren't secondary sources, they're primary sources, sorry.  Expressive101 ( talk ) 11:00, 16 September 2023 (UTC) (Your deletion nominaion is considered your Delete vote.  L iz Read!  Talk!  06:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC) ) [ reply ] Comment Sourcing used in the article is not proving helpful, but this individual seems to have had a TV show on German Tv [3] , so they might meet notability.  Wee bit of coverage here: [4] Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:33, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep Several articles in Swiss German sources, he was on a version of Big Brother [5] .  This seems helpful [6] .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:37, 16 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!  23:17, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] He's considered a (very) minor celebrity in Germany.  Although I'm personally not a fan, I'd argue that he is a person of public interest and meets the notability criteria.  Kitzing ( talk ) 23:33, 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!  23:39, 30 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - there seems to be enough coverage and profiles of the subject to indicate notability.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 05:00, 6 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: no consensus