hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Charity Majors: Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 20:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Software .  Zippybonzo | Talk (he|him) 20:09, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The first source talking about the subject is self published (open New York Times), the second is not reliable (Business Insider).  Keeping this article would go against WP:NBASIC .  This BLP stub has not been improved in more than a year and I believe the subject will have even less notability in the future.  (I am the original filer of the AfD) 128.6.36.94 ( talk ) 20:19, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Administrator note : this is the IP that requested the deletion ( permalink ).  Primefac ( talk ) 20:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: There's no consensus that Business Insider is not reliable per WP:BI .  Here, I think BI is reliable because the article was written by a journalist who works for BI, not via syndication of sponsored content.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 21:31, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: Note that OP who lodged the request for this AfD (not Zippybonzo) was blocked for disruptive editing .  Lizthegrey ( talk ) 22:39, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails WP:NBASIC because almost all sources appear to be interviews, which are primary sources and don't count towards establishing notability.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 21:30, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Honeycomb.io .  A majority of reliable sourcing about Charity relates to the software company she co-founded ( WP:COI disclaimer, I work there, and Charity is my boss).  I would say that the company is more notable (see press references on Crunchbase ) than any of the individual employees would be for their own articles (and indeed Liz Fong-Jones has little to do with Honeycomb and mostly has to do with my pre-Honeycomb life).  Lizthegrey ( talk ) 21:38, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep after changes made by DaffodilOcean ( talk · contribs ) , but like always mind my conflict of interest.  Lizthegrey ( talk ) 16:59, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Changed my mind back to redirect,

Discussion outcome: delete
Sports broadcasting contracts in Denmark: Note that I'm unfortunately nominating a lot of pages separately here because there is consensus at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sports_broadcasting_contracts_in_Serbia that these shouldn't be nominated together.  BrigadierG ( talk ) 16:31, 4 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Sports , Europe ,  and Denmark .  BrigadierG ( talk ) 16:31, 4 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:46, 4 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per my rationale in my previous nomination, literally irredeemable list.  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 23:49, 5 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Not eligible for a Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  19:54, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  This is just a directory.  Mccapra ( talk ) 22:00, 11 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
The Donkey Show (band): Fails the general and band-specific notability policies.  - UtherSRG (talk) 18:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , United States of America ,  and California .  UtherSRG (talk) 18:49, 12 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I can find brief mentions about the band's existence from specific members that were popular by themselves, but nothing decent about the actual band itself.  Darling ☔ ( talk · contribs ) 03:31, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Don't buy the article's assertions about how famous and influential they were.  Instead, they were a local band that got some gig announcements in the local press, a couple of mentions in scenester blogs (e.g. [11] ), and brief mentions as historical tidbits in articles that are actually about other bands or their former members (e.g. [12] ).  Otherwise, all that can be found are the usual social media and self-upload links.  While searching, note that the band's name is also an old Mexican urban myth.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 14:47, 19 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
Tuhinaa Chandrasekhar: Macbeejack ☎ 15:36, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Politicians , India ,  and Tamil Nadu .  Macbeejack ☎ 15:36, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Macbeejack ☎ 15:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Fails the general notability guideline.  There is no source about politician's background and early life and the single source under education segment, does not have any particulars about the politician either.  There is no significant coverage on the political career either and again a single source under political career segment is about the politician spending days with friends.  RangersRus ( talk ) 14:03, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Not seeing WP:NPOL as being met.   Originally created with several junk sources and sources not referring to the same person, Ravensfire ( talk ) 15:50, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 22:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  23.156.104.104 ( talk ) 05:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  Mohammed07102007 ( talk ) 13:50, 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
Alex Anmahian: Contains significant paid mainspace contributions by an employee.  WP:NOTRESUME applies.  The whole slew of awards is a form of WP:BOMBARD .  🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Architecture ,  and Massachusetts .  🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 22:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:05, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I fully agree with @ Timtrent 's deletion nomination.  Will only add that the WP:PAID edits were undisclosed until very recently.  Mel ma nn 09:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I agree with @ Timtrent 's deletion nomination.  Delete : More coverage found about the company than this person.  A few name drops in articles, rest are PR items I find.  Very PROMO.  Not meeting GNG.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:38, 21 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
Bubble Man: Chidgk1 ( talk ) 18:12, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment The ja article is バブルマン .  But the articles are in a pretty poor state so no comment on notability.  Jumpytoo Talk 06:03, 13 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I found no indication of notability on either the English or Japanese version.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 14:12, 18 October 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 23:39, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as the article cites zero sources (also in the Japanese version).  Quick search on google.co.jp yields several non-RS hits, like this Reddit article .  Cielquiparle ( talk ) 11:27, 23 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: delete
Peter Griffith: Subject was never covered in the mass media and had no public career to speak of.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yours6700 ( talk • contribs ) 20:34, March 14, 2024 (UTC) I reformatted the nomination because it wasn't formatted correctly.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 23:08, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Businesspeople , Advertising ,  and United States of America .  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 23:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : WP:INHERIT could be of use here to evaluate sourcing.  TLA tlak 04:49, 16 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!  20:31, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I see no problem with deleting this article.  If Stella's got deleted then his probably should get deleted too.  2603:6080:5D00:2562:32FC:EBFF:FE13:87D8 ( talk ) 23:12, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per lack of reliable sources .  A random family search website, IMdB, and a People interview do not constitute WP:SIGCOV .  Bearian ( talk ) 16:07, 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: delete
William Sparrow Simpson: TheLongTone ( talk ) 14:25, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] He was a fairly prolific author, and did a lot to improve the library at St Paul's Cathedral.  Anna795bc ( talk ) 14:28, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity and England .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:38, 10 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!  07:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Search shows the subject is not notable .  With over 10,000 Anglican Priests the position is not notable.   None of the books written by the subject has achieved Notability and notability is not inherited.  -- Otr500 ( talk ) 16:17, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This is a weak delete.  Had it been there are good sources to verify he wrote those books, this should have slightly meet WP:NAUTHOR .  However, priests are not usually notable except in major cases of appointment in major offices verifiable by source per WP:GNG .  This article is a good case of not meeting good sourcing for Wikipedia's inclusion.  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  02:07, 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
Han Sun-il: Simione001 ( talk ) 03:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 03:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 03:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 03:17, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Does not meet WP:GNG as it has no independent sources at all. -- Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 12:08, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Same case as previous AfD regarding North Korean players.  Svartner ( talk ) 13:43, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Certainly fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV , but I have reservations about national team caps not meeting notability requirements for nationals of countries with almost zero available or trustworthy media coverage.  Anwegmann ( talk ) 00:46, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 09:27, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 09:30, 13 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
Martin Dvořák (dancer): Corresponding article on Czech Wikipedia is also poorly-sourced.  CuteDolphin712 ( talk ) 12:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Dance and Czech Republic .  CuteDolphin712 ( talk ) 12:13, 9 February 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 14:41, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - seems poorly sourced, and poorly written Mr Vili talk 23:13, 22 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
Ines de Ramon: BilCat ( talk ) 17:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Women ,  and Switzerland .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:55, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I can't find anything that isn't about her relationship to Brad Pitt in recent news - because there's just so much of it.  Refining a search to before 2021 just gets hits about her relationship with her previous famous boyfriend.  Setting the range back to before that relationship started, I found nothing at all.  If anyone manages to find notable coverage in the deluge of celebrity gossip pieces, feel free to ping me for a reconsider.  -- asilvering ( talk ) 21:35, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I concur.  I'll be continuing to watch the discussions here to see if notable coverage is discovered.  BilCat ( talk ) 22:36, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per Asilvering exactly.  If there is any coverage that isn't based on her being a specific movie star's girlfriend, I will be happy to change my mind, but this seems to be a case of WP:NOTINHERITED .  We bend that rule/essay for First Ladies, etc., but  (a) Brad Pitt is not the President, and  (b) girlfriend is generally not a lifetime status.  -- GRuban ( talk ) 18:24, 1 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I have similarly failed to find evidence of her own importance.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 11:36, 5 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
NJ Oosthuizen: JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union ,  and South Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:40, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG .  No suitable redirect per WP:ATD .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 18:48, 18 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
James Chean: I have moved an interview with him from the external links section to a reference.  I have carried out WP:BEFORE but have not found sources to add, so don't think he meets WP:GNG or WP:FILMMAKER .  Tacyarg ( talk ) 23:08, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Film , Myanmar ,  and California .  Tacyarg ( talk ) 23:08, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The fact that this person was interviewed by The Myanmar Times interested me, so I conducted a thorough search for sources, looking up every single movie he was involved with.  However, I could only find one review from Variety on The Last Eve , [1] which the subject person made a glancing mention as one of four executive producers.  In other words, his entire filmography consists of either unnotable projects or roles that were too minor to be considered significant contributions to the productions.  I then saw that he was said to have debuted in Hong Kong action cinema, so I tried to look him up on the Hong Kong Movie Database (where information is generally well-preserved), but I could not even find him listed.  With only one interview source and all their film involvement being insignificant, the subject person fails both GNG and NACTOR.  — Prince of Erebor （ The Book of Mazarbul ） 18:08, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , I was not able to find anything beyond the source search conducted by Prince of Erebor, and all of the major pieces are interviews and therefor not independent.  Fails N. microbiology Marcus [ petri dish · growths ] 16:12, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails both WP:GNG and WP:FILMMAKER .  Hardly any coverage on his projects as a filmmaker.  — Young Forever (talk) 22:31, 22 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
Andrea Haines: For a start, all appointments listed seem of local or regional interest only, no prestigious positions in Wikipedia terms are listed, and comparison of her Google Scholar results with the archived list of her research publications doesn't show any heavily cited work.  Graham87 ( talk ) 18:04, 8 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Women ,  and New Zealand .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:08, 8 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment as creator: I'm currently WP:TBAN from BLPs so it would be inappropriate for me to comment in this discussion, but I am aware of it.  Stuartyeates ( talk ) 04:29, 9 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Delete but pending based on whether "New Zealand Federation of Film Societies" is a significant enough organization that Presidency is considered an acknowledgement of significant reputation in the field.   The TEU meritorious service award is not sufficient in itself (Life Membership would definitely be, and the TEU Excellence Award might be, but the meritorious service award is for supporting staff at the branch level).  On the other hand, not harming the encyclopedia and not overtly promotional, and in an area that we have systemic bias problems against (women in film), but there's just not enough here yet to override the WP:PROF or GNG guidelines against keeping.  -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 21:39, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'd be leaning towards no regarding the New Zealand Federation of Film Societies, per the description on its "about" page and the fact that its only other mentions on Wikipedia are in the article about the [[ New Zealand International Film Festival , the Film society page, and the page about the playwright Campbell Smith , whose notability seems to rest on other things. Graham87 ( talk ) 03:09, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  21:23, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I'm not seeing anything that rises to the level of notability here.  Certainly no pass of WP:PROF and we have no evidence of the kind of sourcing needed to pass WP:GNG .  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 19:59, 16 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: delete
Prabhakar Chaudhary (IPS): Nothing of wide coverage, controversies, positive reaction or otherwise in media.  Nor holding a significant post in control of a large area of administration (for example Commissioner of Police (India) or of similar).  All I can see is various postings and transfers as well as minor cases of disputes.  Fails WP:GNG in my opinion, as of now.  Fylindfotberserk ( talk ) 13:55, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Police ,  and India .  Fylindfotberserk ( talk ) 13:55, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Uttar Pradesh-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:07, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Routine coverage of a police person, who gets transferred a lot, is not notable.  Coverage is of police actions he was involved with as is routine.  Nothing for GNG Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:08, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No notable/significant events seem present or even really hint at notability.  A MINOTAUR ( talk ) 15:35, 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