hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Chanuka Wijesundara: Promotional and fails WP:BIO .  ThaddeusSholto ( talk ) 17:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Not all sources are primary.  Also there are some secondary sources which are not interviews.  Making a global website useful to Sri Lankan is a huge thing, it may be not as important as in USA, UK or other developed countries.  But, it is remarkable for Sri Lanka.  He has made websites and two more global connections to uplift Sri Lankans in the other countries.  So I think he is notable.  More citations will come in the near future.  NireshaJAththa ( talk ) 22:44, 2 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Sri Lanka ,  and Canada .  Shellwood ( talk ) 17:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:34, 2 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 17:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  19:36, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – The claim to notability is Lankan Square, but the non-interview sourcing there doesn't go actually deep about Chanuka Wijesundara and really only has quotes.  TLA tlak 10:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete lacks indepth coverage about the subject Chanuka Wijesundara fails WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 20:19, 22 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
Garric Simonsen: The subject does not appear to pass the WP:GNG or WP:NARTIST .  While several references are included here, these either do not mention this individual at all, or merely list them as one of the artists included in a gallery.  Searches did not turn up much else - image galleries and mentions of participating in an exhibit, but nothing that could be actual significant coverage.  The closest that it comes is articles in college newspapers for colleges that he was a faculty member of, which I don't believe would be sufficient for actually passing the WP:GNG .  It looks like this article went through an AFD back in 2015, but was closed as No Consensus due to minimal participation, and so has been languishing here, poorly sourced, ever since.  Rorshacma ( talk ) 17:22, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Artists ,  and Washington .  Rorshacma ( talk ) 17:22, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Not covered in the Getty ULAN, some limited coverage here [1] and here [2] (second one is a limited view based in my IP so I can't pull most of it up).  I don't think these are enough for notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:30, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I am not finding RS for the biographical information presented in the article.  Previous request for deletion was closed as "no consensus", but the article was only defended by the creator.  Subject fails WP:ARTIST .  WP:TOO SOON , no substantial coverage and not in any notable collections.  -- WomenArtistUpdates ( talk ) 19:37, 17 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
Media5-fone: I found no Google Books hits.  Joy ( talk ) 17:21, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software .  Joy ( talk ) 17:21, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails GNG and NCORP.  Sources are promo and primary, nothing that meets IS RS with SIGCOV.  BEFORE showed nothing with SIGCOV.  // Timothy :: talk 07:40, 1 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Less Unless ( talk ) 11:24, 3 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 13:03, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oh yeah, when this was first written and proposed for deletion, this was the deprodding diff .  No secondary references were added to establish notability there, and the writer turned out to be a classic single-purpose account .  We've assumed good faith for almost a decade by now, it's time to paint over the old grafitti.  -- Joy ( talk ) 17:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep . I added some references. Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 21:14, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I see citations to business 2 community , Univers Freebox , Root.cz . What are these sources? Do they prove general notability? Are they used in our other articles about software or telecommunications? -- Joy ( talk ) 10:48, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Even with the added sources the article still fails WP:GNG , WP:NORG , and WP:NSOFT .  Business2Community is a WordPress blog that uses freelance writers to generate content and does not appear to be a reliable source.  This source is about a petition to restore SIP on the Freebox and has nothing to do with Media5-fone, which is only mentioned once in passing in the comments section of that article.  While I understand French, the Root.cz article is written in Czech which I do not speak and I do not know if it is a reliable source or not, but from what I can tell through Google Translate the Media5-fone is only mentioned briefly in a short paragraph and in passing in two other places, and looks like a trivial mention.  These aren't enough to show notability for the article's subject.  - Aoidh ( talk ) 02:33, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: For more input on the sources added by Eastmain.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  08:37, 18 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above.  The person who loves reading ( talk ) 02:06, 25 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
Šimon Kupec: My Google searches are limited to database, match reports, and brief mentions in squad list.  ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Slovakia .  ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:53, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination, I could not find anything outside of the aforementioned sources.  Wiiformii ( talk ) 15:41, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 10:54, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found which show significant coverage please ping me.  Giant Snowman 10:55, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I was unable to locate significant coverage of this individual.  C 679 12:39, 28 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
Yarisleidy Mena: All I found were passing mentions like 1 and 2 .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 22:09, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Cuba .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 22:09, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 12:01, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 12:03, 25 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
Divya Kallachi: Nothing found for sourcing.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:22, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 19:31, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Tamil Nadu .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:45, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Youtube sees a massive coverage over this individual and has been trending over social media.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 101.185.129.20 ( talk ) 01:47, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Further proof that it's not notable, we don't consider trending to be a RS, we need people in the media discussing this.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:54, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk ) 01:43, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Gnews comes up with a few Tamil hits but nothing indepth.  Fails WP:BIO .  LibStar ( talk ) 03:51, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Non notable internet personality, also relying on unreliable or WP:UGC sources [30] [31] [32] Ratnahastin ( talk ) 07:17, 21 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
WODN-LD: Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 02:01, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Indiana .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 02:01, 22 August 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!  02:07, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Here are your Cliffs Notes on this station.  It's the last of four LPTVs that formed the Dunes Television Network, a regional LPTV network in Northwest Indiana that mostly relayed All News Channel with the odd Indiana collegiate event broadcast and local news inserts from WSBT-TV .  LeSEA Broadcasting acquired the others in the 1990s and 2000s but not this one; those are all now dead, having not been converted to digital service.  There is not a lot of coverage to go on.  Clippings: [65] [66] [67] Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 08:36, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Sammi Brie: suffice it to say, this is a topic area where if she can't find sufficient coverage to satisfy the GNG , who can?  Perhaps a brief mention of those WSBT-TV news inserts on the Dunes Television Network could be added to that station's article somewhere, but I doubt that would be enough to, for instance, merit any redirect.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 21:15, 31 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
Battle of Koyulhisar (1461): There are barely two lines about this battle, which are unsourced.  Didn't find anything impressive at Google ebooks neither, nor the Aqquyunlu book of John E. Woods.  HistoryofIran ( talk ) 23:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Turkey .  Owen× ☎ 23:58, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Military .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : A poorly-worded/sourced article on a battle with little long-term historical significance, which doesn't justify a standalone article.  Aintabli ( talk ) 01:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Another opinion could be moving this to a draft named Siege of Koyulhisar (1461), see [3] .  -- HistoryofIran ( talk ) 12:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I prepared this article, but ı see only that it has been heavily edited and filled with ridiculous misinformation.  It would be appropriate to delete the article.  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
Daniel DeWeldon: SmartSE ( talk ) 17:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Maryland and Washington, D.C. .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:16, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:NACTOR .  No indication of significance.  Fails WP:SIGCOV , WP:BIO .  scope_creep Talk 18:05, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above.  NYC Guru ( talk ) 20:16, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:NACTOR and WP:BIO .  Micheal Kaluba ( talk ) 13:15, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Absolutely no indication that this person is notable.  To be honest, I'm surprised this wasn't speedied.  JeffSpaceman ( talk ) 23:16, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:NACTOR .  Drowssap SMM ( talk ) ( contributions ) 00:38, 29 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
Abacus.AI: Sources are all basically press releases/announcements about funding or surface-level commentary about machine learning/AI.  Scientific citations all come from people from the organization itself.  Citing ( talk ) 14:23, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  Citing ( talk ) 14:23, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 14:37, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep but modify.  The sources in the article are reliable, but the article has an overly promotional tone.  Salsakesh ( talk ) 22:00, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There's nothing to be written from the sources.  As noted below, it's only routine coverage of funding rounds.  Every single non-primary source is some variety of "[Company] has raised $X million."  Citing ( talk ) 14:00, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete When you ignore the primary source citations to published papers (which don't count toward establishing notability ) there are only a handful of tech industry sources that mainly focus on the funding rounds raised.  This is pretty routine coverage and isn't really significant enough to establish notability compared to the thousands of startups that get created and die or get acquired every year.  Steven Walling • talk 01:35, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:18, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per Steven's source analysis.  My own research only turned up this ZDNet article as significant coverage, but it isn't enough to meet WP:GNG on its own.  ThadeusOfNazereth (he/him) Talk to Me!  01:09, 1 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions .  North America 1000 04:32, 1 September 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
List of National Invitation Tournament postseason broadcasters: Just another case of WP:LISTCRUFT to appeal to nobody but the small minority of the most ardent fans; another excessively bloated list that is 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 .  Of the sources per WP:RS ; one is a blogpost, one is a dead link, all the other four is WP:PRIMARY and the rest of this list are unsourced.  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 07:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Basketball ,  and Lists .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 07:29, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : WP:NLIST is not met as this grouping isn't discussed in secondary sources.  Let'srun ( talk ) 16:28, 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!  19:54, 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: delete
Japanese privilege: Merging the article to Racism in Japan might seem to be an option, but the facts and sources are patchwork, not coherent, so it's difficult to image how this material might benefit Racism in Japan .  Which is why I think a simple redirect is in order, of course to Racism in Japan .  Binksternet ( talk ) 06:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ethnic groups , Politics , Social science ,  and Japan .  Binksternet ( talk ) 06:08, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] What you're saying is to redirect Japanese privilege to Racism in Japan ?  Mureungdowon ( talk ) 06:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, that is correct.  Binksternet ( talk ) 06:12, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Instead, there should be a "Japanese privilege" item in the Racism in Japan article.  # Mureungdowon ( talk ) 06:24, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete with a bit of merge .  The term is used in a few works but it not very common, and my quick BEFORE is not giving a good case for why this should be a stand-alone article, plus WP:TNT comes to fore, since the article uses this term just in the lead (uncited defininition) and then meanders about various racism- and discrimination- related issues; heck, most of the article is about 'outside Japan' topics; the section on South Africa is totally irrelevant, and then most of the article is about...  Korea?  Korean privilige?  This is indeed very bad and I don't think there is anything salvageable here, even for a merge.  Only the section on 'In Japanese society' has some value, if anyone feels this is worth merging.  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 14:17, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and redirect per nominator.  — CurryTime7-24 ( talk ) 17:42, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Racism in Japan , it's a mess.  -- StellarNerd ( talk ) 18:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete then redirect per nominator.  Even if this was a notable topic that wasn't a FORK, this would need TNT to cleanup.  I removed some material that failed V, but this is still OR / SYNTH.  // Timothy :: talk 13:32, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:SNOW , and possibly redirect.  Bearian ( talk ) 15:16, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not a notable neologism.  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 20:28, 20 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
Vagharshak Grigoryan: The only source that speaks about the subject is a short biographical entry on the website linked to on the page.  No additional information found by searches in Russian and Armenian.  Revolution Saga ( talk ) 08:15, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 April 16 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 08:40, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Armenia .  Shellwood ( talk ) 08:49, 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: delete
Pieter Stemmet: JTtheOG ( talk ) 03:07, 30 May 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 ) 03:07, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG .  No suitable redirect per WP:ATD .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 18:34, 30 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
Ashley Marinaccio: Many claims are unreferenced.  Nothing shows up in Google News.  Also, slightly WP:PROMO .  TLA (talk) 12:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Women , Theatre , Photography ,  and New York .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 13:25, 14 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