hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Rafael Alun Trisambodo: Delete as per WP:PERP , WP:BIO1E .  Onel 5969 TT me 10:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Crime ,  and Indonesia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:57, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:50, 21 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:53, 28 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: no consensus
Narasapura Industrial Area: The thing hasn't actually been built and the whole thing is just a promotional brochure entry right now that is, at best, overdue for TNT.  BrigadierG ( talk ) 01:52, 2 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business , India ,  and Karnataka .  BrigadierG ( talk ) 01:52, 2 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I believe the nominator's WP:BEFORE is not correct, there are numerous references including https://www.proquest.com/docview/2760770168/DF6905B092684D72PQ/1 , https://www.proquest.com/docview/2803425383/DF6905B092684D72PQ/3 , and https://www.proquest.com/docview/2761024527/DF6905B092684D72PQ/2 which say the subject is among the largest of its kind in Asia.  Looking at the map shows it does indeed already exist.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 03:04, 2 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: User:Indefensible .  is there a Keep among your comments?  Or are you just raising the question?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  01:55, 9 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Lean keep but did not finish reviewing.  The references can be used to block WP:PROD though.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 03:00, 9 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!  01:57, 16 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  04:24, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep (or merge) : There is a substantial 2015 Economic Times piece about the process by which this project was developed: "Does Karnataka's Narasapura industrial town offer lessons in land acquisition from farmers? Not quite" .  There was also coverage of workers' protest actions a few years ago at an iPhone assembly plant there; the location is incidental to that event, but does confirm that this Industrial Area is indeed operational.  I did wonder whether a merge to Narsapur, Karnataka might be a useful alternative, as that article looks rather scant and might benefit from extending the details about the area's economy?  AllyD ( talk ) 12:45, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Dearne & District F.C.: Plus, I searched for them online and there are no reliable secondary sources that feature the team in any kind of significant depth, unless you count the Barnsley Chronicle which I don't.  Dafydd y Corach ( talk ) 07:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and England .  Shellwood ( talk ) 13:12, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep They have just been promoted to the 10th tier of English football - all of the hundreds of other clubs at that level have an article.  There are plenty of sources and more will follow Kivo ( talk ) 14:37, 20 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
From Out of the Rain: This TV series doesn't have an individual article for every episode, so that arguement for inclusion is invalid.  In addition, the plot is already covered in the article on the show.  Donald D23 talk to me 15:16, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science fiction and fantasy , Television ,  and United Kingdom .  Donald D23 talk to me 15:16, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Redirect per below unless sources other than standard reviews can be found...but the article's been tagged for needing them since 2014, and that evidently hasn't led to the issue being addressed.  DonIago ( talk ) 15:38, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep IGN , DigitalSpy give two RS reviews, meets GNG.  Jclemens ( talk ) 04:52, 30 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Do you have any sources other than reviews?  DonIago ( talk ) 06:19, 30 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I didn't bother to look; two RS reviews establishes GNG and is sufficient justification for a standalone article.  Do you need my help to Google more?  My first trick is to add the series name ("Torchwood") to the full title of the episode.  Hope that helps.  Jclemens ( talk ) 02:28, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Torchwood episodes .  (I have a feeling this could be expanded into a perfectly fine article, but right now, it lacks enough sourcing). -- Gen. Quon [Talk] 21:19, 30 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment , a REDIRECT to the series or season page would be a viable WP:ATD Donald D23 talk to me 20:54, 6 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect or weak keep .  Two reliable reviews found by User:Jclemens do seem to meet the minimum required by GNG as I understand it (two in-depth, reliable treatments).  But none of this is present in the article, which is just an unreferenced plot summary like now, so a redirect to the list of episodes is fine too unless someone fixes the article by adding those sources.  Until that happens, the article does not meet our policies and a soft delete via redirecting might be a temporary solution until someone decides to make it policy-compliant (If kept but not improved, I suggest tagging this with {{ sources exist }} ).  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 02:20, 7 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: no consensus
Resistencia (Venezuela): WMrapids ( talk ) 15:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: Article creator appears to be exaggerating the notability of the "Resistencia" by creating a "popular culture" section that includes a single book that discusses resistance , not the "Resistencia".  At best, this article should be a redirect to guarimba (as previously attempted ) or be draftified until improved. -- WMrapids ( talk ) 15:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You have it the other way around: you're insisting in using the term guarimba as an adjective or to any riot in Venezuela, despite the majority of sources leaving clear that it is a term for barricades. This split should solve any SYNTH issues currently in the main article, and you're free to detail further about violence during the protests here as long as it meets the verifiability conditions. Uninvolved editors are free to learn more about the topic at the article's talk page: Talk:Guarimba . -- NoonIcarus ( talk ) 19:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep La Resistencia is one of the best-known groups in the Venezuelan protests, just as it happens with decentralized groups in other countries like Antifa .  It was already mentioned in the 2017 Venezuelan protests article and Resistencia disambiguation years before the nominator started the Guarimba article, and its notability is demonstrated in its independent coverage that meets WP:GNG : [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] .  -- NoonIcarus ( talk ) 15:25, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] See Guarimba 's split version as a reference: [38] . -- NoonIcarus ( talk ) 13:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics ,  and Venezuela .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 18:27, 3 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 02:04, 11 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
Hawkesbury Village: I propose either deletion or maybe merging it into Exhall which is directly west of it.  It has no civil parish, any real historical significance and lacks any realiable sources to warrant a standalone article under WP:Notability and WP:Reliability .  DragonofBatley ( talk ) 21:53, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak oppose It has an entry, albeit brief on the Our Warwickshire website [30] and has an entry in Geoff Allen's Town's and Villages of Warwickshire book, though it doesn't say too much.  However it establishes that the oplace is notable enough to be mentioned in external sources.  G-13114 ( talk ) 10:37, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and England .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:12, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Places in England known as "Something-or-other Village " rather than just "Something-or-other" usually have names that have been made up by estate agents trying to boost house prices in the area.  I can see no evidence that this is any different.  Phil Bridger ( talk ) 18:55, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] To be fair most of the sources refer to it as just Hawkesbury.  There is a much older Hawkesbury Junction nearby, so the name has some history.  Maybe it should be moved to just Hawkesbury?  G-13114 ( talk ) 20:09, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes its on the OS as just "Hawkesbury" [31] [32] .  Of which it is an OS settlement (which arguably means its legally recognized) and there is an 19th century mention of it but it doesn't say anything other than its location.  Crouch, Swale ( talk ) 19:41, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There was also a Hawkesbury Lane railway station serving the area from the 1850s to the 1960s.  G-13114 ( talk ) 04:29, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 02:29, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  03:40, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep by WP:GEOLAND , populated places such as villages which are legally recognized (here, by being on the OS) are presumed to be notable.  Chaotic Enby ( talk ) 20:39, 25 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
Digital Access Signalling System 1: Other than that, there's nothing more than mentions of this signalling system.  That Tired Tarantula Burrow 02:11, 2 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 06:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep there are quite a few books available online describing DASS1, other offline sources likely exist: https://archive.org/details/bte-198407/page/n17/mode/2up? q=%22DASS+Signalling%22 https://archive.org/details/bte-198501/page/n27/mode/2up? q=%22Digital+Access+Signalling+System%22 https://archive.org/details/telecommunicatio0000farr/page/76/mode/2up? q=%22Digital+Access+Signalling+System%22 https://archive.org/details/communicationsys0000brew/page/128/mode/2up? q=%22Digital+Access+Signalling+System%22 Based on the coverage in these sources, it seems that a discretionary merger of DASS1 and closely related articles such as Digital Access Signalling System 2 into a single article about the history of ISDN in the UK may make sense if somebody decides to write such article in the future.  PaulT2022 ( talk ) 00:05, 3 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Yeah, merging sounds like a good idea.  That Tired Tarantula Burrow 00:46, 3 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 05:07, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 03:31, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Kriwi (band): I removed the bands email address from the main text, and couldn't find any reliable sources about them.  The one source that  exists in the article is to a small defunct fan zine without an editorial board Very Average Editor ( talk ) 05:14, 3 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Belarus .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:10, 3 April 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 05:44, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm leaning keep on this.  There are a lot of foreign-language Google hits that appear to demonstrate sigcov, eg.  [59] , [60] , [61] , [62] , [63] .  I can't confidently assess the reliability of these sources, but I think the band is likely to be notable.  Sojourner in the earth ( talk ) 07:45, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't know if this is important, but in 1999 they were recognized as the best rock band in Belarus . -- Берберов Иван ( talk ) 10:46, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That award doesn't seem significant enough in itself to grant automatic assumed notability, but if you can find reliable sources reporting on Kriwi's win, that could help.  Sojourner in the earth ( talk ) 15:57, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Courcelles ( talk ) 13:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Analysis of the proposed sources would be very helpful in determining how to proceed.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Seraphimblade Talk to me 02:29, 26 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
Mikhail Vasilyevich Popov: In politics, an assistant to a regional deputy and does not pass WP:NPOLITICIAN .
 On the web, does not pass WP:NYOUTUBE with such a small audience.
 It's true he's the author of a bunch of works, but that doesn't provide notability itself.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 19:58, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Russia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , Meets WP:BASIC : sigcov of studies in the US [42] sigcov of a speech given by subject: [43] , part interview, part independent sigcov [44] some sigcov verifying various information in the notes for this book published by Harvard University Press [45] Should be enough, but almost certainly more in non-English-language sources as well.  — siro χ o 20:48, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Siroxo : Are you sure that's our guy?  I just don't see anywhere that he is connected with the "Siberian branch of the Soviet Union's Academy of Sciences".  I mean, he's from St. Petersburg.  Also, I think if he had traveled to the US in the 80's as part of Soviet delegation, it would have been mentioned on the Russian page.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 21:27, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] In my search I found at least 3 other contemporary people with reasonable coverage with the same first and last name (and English-language sources often do not include the patronymic), so it's possible a couple of these sources describe yet another, but there's a few similarities to the subject of the article.  The gaps in degrees from this article lines up with being "distracted" by these related political pursuits at various times.  The fact that he studied philosophy and economics seems to line up with the sources I listed.  But I am not positive — siro χ o 19:46, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment: the Russian article, ru:Попов, Михаил Васильевич (учёный) is much longer and has more citations.  On the other hand, I'm not sure they establish notability.  Here's a copy of his CV at St. Petersburg University .  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 21:03, 26 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!  20:28, 2 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, North America 1000 09:04, 10 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
Umar Khel: This article should be considered for deletion due to a lack of credible sources and failure to meet the general notability criteria WP:V .  O chawal ( talk ) 07:20, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Ethnic groups , Asia , Afghanistan , Pakistan ,  and Central Asia .  O chawal ( talk ) 07:20, 26 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft deletion due to previous WP:PROD .  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, RL0919 ( talk ) 23:36, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  This source has several pages of information about a military conflict impacting the village where the Umar Khel live (the village is also named Umar Khel).  The 2011 source also has brief coverage of  a different military conflict involving the Umar Khel .  This 2020 source lists them as an existing subdividsion of the Hotak Khel/Hassan Khel tribe and this 1983 source and this 2004 source list them as under the Nano Khel.  The United States government geo located the tribe in this 1962 source , this 1922 source includes them, as does this 1914 source .  The first source is really the only one with in-depth coverage, but I think that a verifiable people group is encyclopedic.  Lastly I am fairly confident that significant coverage exists in J. A. Robinson (1978).  Notes on Nomad Tribes of Eastern Afghanistan .  Gosha-e-Adab.  which is snippet view stated "Umar Khel . - 95 families which are nomadic and have no flocks or land , exist by trade between Kandahar and Dera Ismail Khan . They migrate with the Nasar..."  That's all I could see but it appears there was more.  4meter4 ( talk ) 16:21, 10 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!  23:17, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:02, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Mindanao Gazette: Although there are passing mentions in those sources, it's not an indication of the subject's notability.  Israel's Son 11:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism , News media ,  and Philippines .  Israel's Son 11:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:27, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus