hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Make.org: NotAGenious ( talk ) 08:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Law , Websites ,  and Europe .  NotAGenious ( talk ) 08:55, 4 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions .  A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 02:36, 5 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!  08:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I'm also unable to find any coverage of this organization at all other than their own webpage.  Rehsarb ( talk ) 13:22, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I did find a page from MIT, but it was a simple listing.  Nothing I could find to disprove WP:GNG failure.  RetroCosmos talk 13:25, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Check Axel Dauchez [ fr ] but doesn't look like there is enough related to it IgelRM ( talk ) 04:06, 15 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
List of Missouri's congressional districts by HDI: Fails WP:GNG as this is a topic that seems to have garnered no attention whatsoever.  See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Alabama Congressional Districts by HDI which this was attempted to be bundled into in 2020 and should have been deleted then.  Hog Farm Talk 02:43, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Missouri .  Hog Farm Talk 02:43, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Also nominating List of Arizona's congressional districts by HDI ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Reywas92 Talk 03:40, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not updated since 2010; since then, MO-09 has dissolved and the remaining districts have been updated.  Fails WP:NOTSTATS ; only reference is dead.  – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 02:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 02:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete And bundling List of Arizona's congressional districts by HDI , which also should have been deleted then.  Reywas92 Talk 03:40, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I agree with LaundryPizza03 .   The archive hyperlink doesn't provide any such data, and even if it did, these data are 13 years out of date.   I agree with Reywas92 .   The exact same applies to List of Arizona's congressional districts by HDI .  Uncle G ( talk ) 04:57, 30 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
List of punk artists and styles: The additional qualifier "styles" is completely unreferenced.  Nothing here needs to be merged, so I'm proposing to delete instead.  Binksternet ( talk ) 15:47, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Lists of people .  Binksternet ( talk ) 15:47, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - In complete agreement with the nominator on redundancy and the unsupported use of "styles".  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 19:31, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Article redundant when better quality lists already exist.  Lflin16 - Member of Recent Changes Patrol ( talk ) 20:59, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Poor original research and useless outline.  Why?  I Ask ( talk ) 21:34, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Yep.  No real need for this list when comprehensive lists already exist.  Rupples ( talk ) 01:41, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - As a punk fan since 1979, record collector, zine publisher, and label dude, I have some expertise in the subject matter.  The list is not bad, nor is the breakdown into subgenres in any substantial way "original" or incorrect.  What may well be a compelling case against this particular list is its redundancy to List of punk rock bands, 0–K and List of punk rock bands, L–Z , mentioned by Binksternet above.  Carrite ( talk ) 15:17, 27 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
Franc Lena: All that I can find are transfer announcements that mention him briefly like Panorama , ABC News 1 , a copy and paste of a press announcement from his own club, ABC News 2 , a single passing mention, and 2lonline .  He appears to be known as "Franci Lena" but searching this also doesn't yield any WP:SIGCOV .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:36, 30 March 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) 16:36, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 16:46, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , the Albanian second tier even failed the old football guideline as, with stadium attendance is in the hundreds, the league was clearly not professional.  Likewise, this was clearly not an impactful football career.  Geschichte ( talk ) 17:19, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete -  not notable at all.  WizardGamer775 ( talk ) 19:19, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I don't think this fails WP:SPORTBASIC , necessarily, but it clearly fails WP:SIGCOV .  Anwegmann ( talk ) 01:42, 31 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
Ashutosh Valani: He’s not generally notable fails WP:GNG Autograph ( talk ) 09:03, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and India .  Autograph ( talk ) 09:03, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment sources covering mostly about the Beardo, no in-depth coverage so far.  Autograph ( talk ) 09:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Gujarat-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:46, 28 July 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!  05:34, 4 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!  05:15, 11 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG on his own - the sourcing is either list articles or about the company.  SportingFlyer T · C 09:51, 11 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
Shehzad Poonawala: -- Syed A. Hussain Quadri ( talk ) 05:15, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Politicians , India ,  and Maharashtra .  Syed A. Hussain Quadri ( talk ) 05:15, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] While greeting elder brother, I want to tell you that Shahzad Poonawala is the official spokesperson of Bharatiya Janata Party.  Information about him is available on the official website of the Bharatiya Janata Party as well as in many major news publications as source links, hence this page.  should not be removed WaftCinematic ( talk ) 06:05, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete numerous AfD discussions have established that being a national spokesperson for a political party does not indicate an NPOL pass, and since their job is to speak for the party, multiple citations of them doing their job don’t establish notability either.  Mccapra ( talk ) 18:08, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No indication of signifcance.  Certainly not a politician.  Fails WP:SIGCOV , WP:BIO .  scope_creep Talk 08:57, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails GNG and not passes NPOL.  ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️ Let's Talk !  10:57, 19 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
Sarah Kirby-Yung: Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:34, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Women ,  and Canada .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:34, 20 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, D u s t i *Let's talk! * 12:37, 27 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
Sulaimanitherium: Only used by Malkani.  No secondary sources.  Headbomb { t · c · p · b } 18:03, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Animal , Organisms ,  and Pakistan .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:54, 12 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!  18:44, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nominate.  Ta-tea-two-te-to ( talk ) 23:21, 21 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
Anabell López: It has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve this.  Boleyn ( talk ) 19:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete ; No claim of notability or any indication that it meets WP:MUSICBIO .  I could not find coverage from reliable sources to meet WP:GNG .  -- Crystallizedcarbon ( talk ) 19:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Doesn't meet WP:GNG requirements, and I couldn't find any better sources.  Thebookstamper ( talk ) 15:38, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Cuba-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:05, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:05, 17 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
Mars Hill Community Church: Search is complicated by similarly named megachurches Mars Hill Church and Mars Hill Bible Church , but I don't think this church has any coverage.  ~ A412 talk!  22:33, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion and Georgia (U.S. state) .  ~ A412 talk!  22:33, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:32, 14 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 ) 23:27, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not a notable Mega Church, just a church MNewnham ( talk ) 01:14, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep It's not a mega church, but it's physically at the epicenter of Lost Mountain, Georgia and important to the community there.  When the community is inevitably incorporated, it will be the largest in Cobb County, Georgia and this church as been around for nearly 30 years serving that community.  50.192.32.21 ( talk ) 16:02, 21 February 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!  23:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No SIGCOV demonstrated, especially for a church that is 27 years old, and the sources provided are either internal/church-created or fall under WP:NOYT .  Anwegmann ( talk ) 02:44, 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
La Salle High School Faisalabad: Fails WP:NORG .  BookishReader ( talk ) 12:30, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Pakistan .  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 12:46, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oppose : unless nominator is able to provide assurances that they have conducted in concentrated in print and/or local media.  This is a weak nomination and should be opposed on the basis of WP:BEFORE, and the outcome of RfC on secondary school notability unless that can be demonstrated Jack4576 ( talk ) 15:26, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, I did a thorough WP:BEFORE.  I use ProQuest for my research purposes.  I'm a Pakistani by birth and a native speaker of Urdu language.  I searched all the major newspapers in Pakistan.  For your information, there are large number of English-language newspapers in Pakistan.  Big three are: The News International , Dawn , and The Express Tribune .  I searched in these newspapers and using its transliteration in Urdu as well.  I'm adding transliteration in the article, so you can search as well.  BookishReader ( talk ) 21:21, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm satisfied, Delete if you wish.  Its a sad thing to do and will make the website less encyclopedic, however, you at least have WP's policy endorsement to do so.  Jack4576 ( talk ) 18:09, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You need to strike out your "oppose" above.  LibStar ( talk ) 00:41, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Christianity .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:01, 11 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Nom's searches clearly demonstrate WP:NSCHOOL is not met.  LibStar ( talk ) 00:42, 13 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no SIGCOV, doesn't pass NSCHOOL.  AryKun ( talk ) 04:09, 15 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
Joyce Namirimo Tamale: A WP:BEFORE search turns up only the interview in the ACCA house magazine cited here, the rest is only passing mentions.  Her honorary doctorate is from the "Swiss School of Business and Management", which appears to be a degree mill , since it's not listed in the Swiss Accreditation Council's website.  Article was moved to draft, submitted without improvement today, then copypasted to main space four minutes later.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 09:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Women ,  and Uganda .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 09:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I can't find anything either.  (and of course, the being a resume doesn't help the case for retention either)  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 14:32, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete coverage merely confirms education and positions held.  Does not meet WP:BIO .  LibStar ( talk ) 03:26, 16 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
LiveAboard.com: The PROD was removed by an IP with the comment "Passes GNG" so I am now bringing it to AfD with the same rationale as before.  AllyD ( talk ) 08:48, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Netherlands .  AllyD ( talk ) 08:48, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] delete PROMO for the contest is all I find.  Lack of sources.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 12:04, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions .  AllyD ( talk ) 08:50, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Only three of the references even mention the website.  One only mentions that the website is having a sweepstake for a shark dive trip and nothing else about it; the other two are about a partnership between Scuba.com and LiveAboard.com, one of which is written by the staff at Scuba.com, making it non-independent, and the other of which appears on the same website as the first ref, meaning it has only been covered by one source.  Fails WP:GNG .  ben ǝʇᴉɯ 10:10, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The IP was wrong: insufficient WP:RS to pass GNG.  Fad Ariff ( talk ) 12:01, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Creator had the right but no content-based justification for removing the PROD.  gidonb ( talk ) 02:06, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  It's snowing! gidonb ( talk ) 02:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG lacks indepth coverage.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 06:44, 18 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
Recovery of Chittorgarh (1321): Many forts has been captured and recaptured several times in the military history.  Seperate articles are made whenever they are notable.  As seems, the article is poorly written, taken the reference from broken lines from the sources.  No in-depth description about this in any of the reliable sources.  Fails GNG, and the title is a fabricated one.  Imperial [AFCND] 11:45, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:27, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:27, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 13:27, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] How could you call a historical battle fabricated?  It was a turning point in history of Mewar State.  I don't think it's Necessary to remove the article Sinsilal ( talk ) 13:45, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History and Military .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 14:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Sources are very poor and unreliable.  The battle segment has source by a writer who was a pilot and that too does not draw any parallel with any battle.  Fails WP:HISTRS , WP:V and WP:GNG .  RangersRus ( talk ) 14:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] ok I'm moving the article to draft again and I would add more sources and extend the article Sinsilal ( talk ) 04:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Sinsilal , do not move an article being discussed at an AFD to Draft space nor remove the AFD tag.  If you persist, you could lose your editing privileges for disruptive editing.  L iz Read!  Talk!  06:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – fails notability guidelines with no reliable sources on Gbooks and Scholar.  Toadette ( Let's discuss together! ) 19:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: - The creator of this article is found to be a sock of a common POV pusher. -- Imperial [AFCND] 12:50, 22 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  One source cannot be found, another does not entirely support the narrative, such as it is, the others are difficult to search for lack of page numbers.  Brief, poorly written.  Written by sock of a POV pusher, unreliable.  I agree with the previous commentators.  Donner60 ( talk ) 04:54, 24 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
KHWB-LD: Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 05:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Christianity ,  and Oregon .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 05:28, 12 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