hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Heidelberg University Faculty of Theology: Indefensible ( talk ) 03:28, 6 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools , Christianity ,  and Germany .  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 04:46, 6 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Individual faculties of a long-established large research university ought to be notable.  There's no corresponding article in the German Wikipedia, but the German article on the university has a lot of information about theology.  Searching for the German name might help.   See

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Benazir Bhutto Shaheed University of Technology and Skill Development: I don't see it passing WP:ORG either.  — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 09:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions .  — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 09:21, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Schools .  Shellwood ( talk ) 10:58, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - appears notable, see Jang , Urdu Point , Dawn , [2] , Business Recorder , Urdu Point , Daily Outcome , Dunya , Jang , etc.  Again, I'd like to stress that the nominator posted 7 AfD nominations with identical rationales with 2 minutes, no indication of any real WP:BEFORE being performed.  -- Soman ( talk ) 12:53, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Soman , Urdu Point and Daily Outcome are not even RS while the coverage in rest of the sources are not sig/in-depth.  Do we need a standalone WP article on every university exists on this planet?  Fails WP:NCORP IMO.  — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 13:08, 21 May 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 ) 17:41, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Does any law from the government or state say it's a public university?  Charlie ( talk ) 04:41, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] CharlieMehta , This is what HEC says HEC NOC granted provisionally for 6 months upto June, 2017​ .  — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 08:31, 28 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ CharlieMehta : [3] 2A04:4A43:8F7F:F92B:181:CFCB:7DE9:2831 ( talk ) 13:28, 7 June 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!  22:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep meets WP:NONPROFIT .  It is a state-funded university, established through an act of parliament ( passed in 2016 ).  188.29.153.221 ( talk ) 13:27, 7 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
George Braakman: PROD removed.  Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and United States of America .  Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:38, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Subject has some decent coverage at [ [38] ] and [ [39] ].  Not a ton here but probably enough to pass the WP:GNG .  Let'srun ( talk ) 14:01, 11 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!  03:46, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Skating-related deletion discussions .  Owen× ☎ 12:39, 18 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!  02:37, 24 May 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, L iz Read!  Talk!  04:22, 31 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
Danish Ali: The rest are trivial mentions.  This seems an AUTOBIO.  Saqib ( talk ) 16:45, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Entertainment , Pakistan ,  and Canada .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:37, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Politician with the same name, nothing for this person.  I tried . ca websites, nothing found.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:10, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Passes WP:GNG .  Pretty significant coverage in The Express Tribune , INSTEP Magazine , The Express Tribune , The National .  Insight 3 ( talk ) 02:43, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:36, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong Keep : It passes WP:GNG .  CastJared ( talk ) 08:13, 19 June 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!  01:07, 26 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
Fleur Revell: None of the conditions outlined in the notability guideline for creative professionals apply in her case.  There are many articles that mention her in the context of her affair but it isn't significant coverage.  She has supposedly won 3 Qantas awards yet there is no evidence of that online and the claim is unreferenced.  There might be proof in print and not online since she probably received them in the 90's.  If that cannot be proved, there is not much to base her notability on.  Certainly not the affair.  Ynsfial ( talk ) 08:07, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women , Journalism , Television ,  and New Zealand .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 08:09, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Independent reliable sources with significant coverage exist but they are largely off-line publications from 1990s.  I have added several such off-line citations.  shaidar cuebiyar ( talk ) 02:07, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : not enough significant coverage EncyclopediaEditorXIV ( talk ) 17:54, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep You don’t win three Qantas Media Awards without getting some attention.  That happened at a time for which we have few online sources, though.  Schwede 66 19:12, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , some of the sourcing amounts to OR.  Interviews don't establish notability.  Only source that can establish notability is this article: https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/no-idea-what-next-for-fleur/NHVADVZ4KX5NZRLJFUHGB3PUBA/ The rest of the sources being not about her, interviews, or non-independent PR releases, and I fail to see GNG being met.  I'd even argue the Qantas Media Awards fail GNG too, don't really see any independent coverage of that either.  Traumnovelle ( talk ) 00:00, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep there is some relatively negative reporting around her relationship with Paul Holmes in a couple of national newspapers and her departure from New Idea is also covered.  I think more work needs to be done researching her and agree with Swede's view that her attaining three Qantas Media awards, in itsself, is sufficient to meet notability.  I accept that a reference to properly establish this is necessary but that will take some time and research as the papers of the time are not online.  NealeWellington ( talk ) 22:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:22, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note I removed poorly sourced content per WP:BLP , old version is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php? title=Fleur_Revell&oldid=1230245045 Traumnovelle ( talk ) 21:18, 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: no consensus
Bolt Action Five: Boleyn ( talk ) 21:46, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:59, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:59, 13 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 22:12, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I think the Guardian source [8] is SIGCOV.  I don't have access to the Artrocker or NME sources, but if either of those is significant than I would say GNG is met.  I don't think the FRINKmusic reference is RS though.  Jfire ( talk ) 00:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Owen× ☎ 22:57, 27 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
Richard Marazano: On the French Wikipedia, it says he is an author.  The article also cites no sources, the tone does not seem encyclopedic, and his official website has become a phising link.  // 💪Benzo💪 ( Send me a message! ) ( Here's what I've contributed. ) 07:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists , Authors ,  and Comics and animation .  // 💪Benzo💪 ( Send me a message! ) ( Here's what I've contributed. ) 07:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Seems like a promotional article to me.  Or a phishing scam to steal from Wikipedia users.  I've gone ahead and removed the URL for now.  ImperialMajority ( talk ) 14:25, 28 March 2023 (UTC) (sock strike L iz Read!  Talk!  17:02, 31 March 2023 (UTC) ) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:40, 28 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:43, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I salvaged some broken links and added some references.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 17:28, 4 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Salvio giuliano 22:27, 11 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
Patrick Smyth (runner): No major achievements or medals won.  Natg 19 ( talk ) 20:35, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and United States of America .  Natg 19 ( talk ) 20:35, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Meets WP:NTRACK - Top 8 finish at 2017 World Mountain Running Championships (and team bronze).  Plus, along with what is in the article appears to meet WP:GNG with these: [14] , [15] , [16] , [17] .  RonSigPi ( talk ) 21:28, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep We don't decide whether to keep an article based on achievements or medals won, we decide based on the presence or non-presence of coverage.  And this athlete has enough specific coverage as demonstrated above.  -- Habst ( talk ) 14:37, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as none of the sources provide Wikipedia:Significant coverage beyond saying he won X championship.  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 02:00, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Stifle ( talk ) 10:10, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The Runner's World and ESPN articles (a few comments above this one) are good sources, the interview can fill in the spaces but is primary sourcing.  I think we have enough for notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:13, 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: no consensus
Nader Mousavizadeh: No significant independent coverage, fails Notability.  Not sure, why he is notable, if he has a page as he was former United Nations official, every  former United Nations official should be there on Wikipedia.  Fishgrail2 ( talk ) 14:57, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Politics ,  and Denmark .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:49, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] As a former advisor to a UN Secretary General (rather than standard official), and author, and quoted commentator in the FT, New York Times etc it is helpful to have an independent source of authority on Mousavizadeh.  He is also the CEO of a large international company that often get press attention and is referenced in other Wikipedia articles.  It is helpful to have it all in one place and for the article to be expanded especially given his role on the WRI board and Trilateral commission?  Bournemouth1066 ( talk ) 11:52, 1 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Passes WP:NAUTHOR for co-authoring Kofi Annan's memoir which is a work that won significant critical attention.  Also passes WP:GNG , more broadly. — Alalch E. 14:13, 2 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!  19:57, 6 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!  23:20, 13 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: no consensus
List of NCAA Division I women's basketball tournament Final Four broadcasters: The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN .  Also, entirely unsourced.  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 07:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Basketball , Lists ,  and United States of America .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 07:43, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , with sourcing from [32] , [33] and [34] .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Esolo5002 ( talk • contribs ) 18:58, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Doesn't stop the fact that this is still noting but a directory per WP:NOTDIRECTORY .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 15:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  The sources provided are about the ratings which can be a blurb in each Final Four article.  However, media sections regarding which station, play-by-play, and color commentator is not necessarily notable to collegiate basketball (men's or women's).  Conyo14 ( talk ) 20:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, North America 1000 08:57, 9 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Sandstein 12:36, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment All 14 sources are WP:PRIMARY .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 13:12, 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: no consensus
Presbyterian Church in Korea (YeJangHapBo): It would flood the AfD log, so consider this a stand-in nomination since there's not really a way to nominate multiple articles at once with Twinkle.  Drowssap SMM 01:59, 7 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Religion , Christianity ,  and South Korea .  Drowssap SMM 01:59, 7 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Lean delete for this specific article , but skeptical of the other deletions.  There's not much online that I can find about this branch; here's an article in a major South Korean Christian newspaper that I think is about it: [45] .  However, I think it's likely this and other branches are covered in detail in Korean-language academic sources that are behind paywalls or are in print.  The Presbyterian Church in South Korea is infamously fractured and is well studied.  The larger branches especially should not be deleted.  Here's an article in The Chosun Ilbo about the Presbyterian Church in Korea (HapDong) and Presbyterian Church of Korea (TongHap) : [46] .  Another in Kukmin Ilbo about TongHap: [47] .  Tl;dr the deletion proposals I think need to be individually made, with searches in the Korean language.  toobigtokale ( talk ) 08:44, 7 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep the source identified above is about it and the size of the membership suggests there should be more coverage, imv Atlantic306 ( talk ) 20:07, 10 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!  05:18, 14 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!  05:16, 21 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
Rick Richmond: Let'srun ( talk ) 00:42, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Law ,  and California .  Let'srun ( talk ) 00:42, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  (retracting !vote due to below sourcing which I cannot access)  Comment .  (Updated !vote: Weak keep based on judicial nom + local coverage below for BIO.)  Aside from the fact of the nomination, coverage all seems to be statements from the subject, not secondary/independent sigcov.  The only secondary source I found, presuming it even is this subject, is this reference to an interview [25] .  Possibly meets BLP1E as exclusionary, but doesn't meet BASIC/GNG either.  — siro χ o 00:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Siroxo : Go to WP:LIBRARY and after clicking on the Database access link, scroll down to the ProQuest link.  APK whisper in my ear 06:29, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks for the help.  I have successfully parts of the Wikipedia library before but didn't realize you could access ProQuest like that!  — siro χ o 06:34, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:BIO .  Besides the sources mentioning his nomination, I found this article covering Richmond's philanthropy and this article where the local lawyer's association gave him a Lifetime Service Award.  APK whisper in my ear 05:51, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete a non-notable WP:BLP1E for his failed judicial nomination.  SportingFlyer T · C 13:55, 17 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!  00:45, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Non-notable BLP.  I've done some research and can possibly see why his nomination to district court failed.  He's an attorney aged 63-64.  This source repeats what others sources say.   He has "tried over 15 cases" and "argued 17 appeals" Lower down in the same source it says, "he argued 14 appeals". ( "Rick Richmond at Republican National Lawyers Association" . Republican National Lawyers Association . )  That's not much for an attorney of that age.  Neither this source, nor others, say his cases were successful.  — Maile ( talk ) 03:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: I don't see a consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  01:19, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Alternative proposal : Merge with others in this group into a single article along the lines of Unsuccessful Donald Trump judicial nominations .  BD2412 T 04:42, 1 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: no consensus
Wang Zhi'an: cited sources are his YouTube videos.  Maliner ( talk ) 15:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism , Television ,  and China .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:39, 16 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