hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Sore Throat (punk/new wave band) : WikiDan61 ChatMe!  ReadMe!!  15:40, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD cannot be processed correctly because of an issue with the header.   Please make sure the header has only 1 article, and doesn't have any HTML encoded characters.  — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 08:48, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England .  WikiDan61 ChatMe!  ReadMe!!  15:40, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Can only find mentions of individuals with sore throats, nothing about a band.  Gnewspapers doesn't have anything.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 22:27, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - They were a pre-Internet local punk band so sources will be tough to find today, which may be unfair, but unless anyone can find anything in old magazines or punk history books, there is simply not enough with which to build a viable article here.  Note that the article attempts to use an AllMusic bio page, but that page is just an empty placeholder and I suspect that it mixes up two bands of the same name.  I can find no pro reviews or historical discussion for their one album either.  The band is briefly mentioned at the article for one member who moved on to other things -- Matthew Flowers -- and the band could possibly be redirected to him, though I doubt that the current title is a likely search term.  Finally, if the band article survives this process, it needs to be cleaned up severely.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 15:12, 1 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : not much notability, unfortunately; did play on The Old Grey Whistle Test ( video ), but other than that I haven't found much.  I don't think this is worth a redirect; the search term is fairly unlikely and Flowers wasn't really a frontman, just a manager/co-songwriter/keyboard player.  Darling ☔ ( talk · contribs ) 19:02, 3 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Modti inc. : The only significant contributors seem to be closely connected to the subject.  No search results were found outside the Wayback Machine.  🇮🇱🇺🇸JayCubby probby haz NPOV on the Isr. -Pal.  Conflict🇮🇱🇺🇸 talk 20:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  🇮🇱🇺🇸JayCubby probby haz NPOV on the Isr. -Pal.  Conflict🇮🇱🇺🇸 talk 20:05, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology , Computing ,  and Finland .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:44, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] delete fails WP:NORG no independent coverage.  - Altenmann >talk delete company fails WP:NCORP and doesn't have adequate coverage.  Bikerose ( talk ) — Preceding undated comment added 19:51, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I tried to find Finnish language coverage rather unsuccesfully.  Their product looks to have been very briefly featured in a Helsingin Sanomat listicle about startups ( link ; paywalled), but I'm not seeing any independent analytical content in the story, just "this is what Modti says the thing does".  Beyond that, there were a few passing mentions along the lines of "Modti was involved in startup event X" in various smaller news pieces.  Appears to fail WP:NCORP .  - Ljleppan ( talk ) 13:03, 30 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
Charity Clarity : 4 and 2 written by Pratik Dattani, listed as a Huffington Post Contributor .  A Google search doesn't provide any major sources.  Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs ) 13:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and United Kingdom .  Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs ) 13:35, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per source analysis and the fact that the article seems very PROMOy .  Drowssap SMM ( talk ) ( contributions ) 13:44, 21 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
Earth Goddess of the World : There is no such thing as "Earth Goddess of the World" .  Of course there are a bunch of goddesses of Earth, listede in List of earth deities .  Lokys dar Vienas ( talk ) 03:04, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] no redirect : new article , unplausible search term.  Lokys dar Vienas ( talk ) 03:05, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - This is textbook WP:SYNTH -- TheInsatiableOne ( talk ) 08:05, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mythology , Africa ,  and Greece .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:07, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Agree that this is WP:SYNTH ; there are no reliable sources to support this combination of sourced material.  Oppose redirection as an implausible search term (especially with this capitalisation).  WJ94 ( talk ) 09:49, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete huh?  What?  This sounds like it’s a made up New Age religion and not a WP:SYNTH mess about various goddesses of the Earth.  Dronebogus ( talk ) 12:30, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  For what this article is supposed to be, see the existing article List of earth deities and articles linked from there.  -- Metropolitan90 (talk) 09:58, 2 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
General Mariano Alvarez Technical High School : Gaismagorm ( talk ) 19:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Philippines .  Gaismagorm ( talk ) 19:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  GNews search just turns out a mention .  GBooks search just turns out the law for its creation.  GSearch turns out only directory and map/location listings.  Normally I would prefer a redirect to General Mariano Alvarez but the target article has no Education section.  -- Lenticel ( talk ) 05:19, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Lenticel.  This one doesn't meet GNG.  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 06:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Uyama Hiroto : Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG .  - UtherSRG (talk) 14:36, 7 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Bands and musicians ,  and Japan .  UtherSRG (talk) 14:36, 7 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Passes WP:MUSICBIO .  Strong evidence for a well-established career and is well known and well-liked by the social media crowd and music fans.  scope_creep Talk Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:43, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Eddie891 Talk Work 14:58, 21 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  If our subject is "well known and well liked" by people, someone should notify them to try for a few sources that'd support an article here about him.  Try as I might I find zilch .  We cannot keep this by simply asserting " he is notable ".  And the fact that a single-purpose account needed to be drafted for the article's appearance is telling.   - The Gnome ( talk ) 16:31, 26 September 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!  20:16, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete lack of any coverage for this musician.  Even using [2] to try and find sources in Gnews, there are none that show up.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:31, 28 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
Institut Constant de Rebecque : It hasn't had sources since at least 2017 if ever.  JFHJr ( ㊟ ) 03:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Libertarianism , Politics ,  and Switzerland .  JFHJr ( ㊟ ) 03:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:31, 5 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!  03:26, 12 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
Edlorn Williams : No indication of notability.  Unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage on the subject from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:39, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Antigua and Barbuda .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:39, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:12, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:06, 28 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: delete
Extermination of Nagadhatta : However, the sources provide scant information about this conflict, as evident upon reading the article.  The background section has been fabricated with entirely different narratives.  There are no further details provided about the ruler named "Nagadhatta," and it is worth considering the potential disorder in MILHIST-related articles if every minor conflict between two kings were to be given separate articles, especially when details are scarce.  The article fails to meet the notability criteria outlined in Wikipedia's guidelines and lacks substantial reliable sources .  Imperial [AFCND] 16:34, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , History , Military ,  and India .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:48, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , per nominator's arguments.  Tehonk ( talk ) 20:02, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete A fabrication easily seen as Nagadhatta is not an article, so writing about their death (which of course should be called Death of Nagadhatta instead rather than this overly provocative title) makes no sense when we know nothing of their life.  Nate • ( chatter ) 02:08, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Per above and the event lacking general notability.  - Fylindfotberserk ( talk ) 13:52, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  -- HistoryofIran ( talk ) 05:18, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  TrangaBellam ( talk ) 14:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Minimal discussion in sources, lack of sourcing for the statements regardless.  TLA tlak 04:51, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Nandeshwar Mahadev Temple : I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 January 27 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 19:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Hinduism-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Rajasthan-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:51, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:51, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No indication of notability.  Llajwa ( talk ) 13:11, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails GNG, in-depth coverage.  No sources to establish WP:V CSMention269 ( talk ) 10:04, 3 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
Sylk Magazine : The sources are all garbage.  (Note that ref 2 ( Fleshbot ) is NSFW. ) No sign of WP:NMAGAZINE or WP:NWEB notability.  Cheers, gnu 57 18:42, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media , Sexuality and gender ,  and Websites .  gnu 57 18:42, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:50, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Hits in Gsearch for DJ Sylk, Silk Sonic...  Nothin for this magazine.  I suppose if it's defunct, there won't be any.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:45, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete ASAP.  Their website triggered an anti-virus alert on my computer.  I have commented out the pages with an editor note re the anti-virus alert.   – S. Rich ( talk ) 20:53, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - No sources to be found to pass WP:GNG .  Current sources are two press releases and one blog that used to be apart of Gawker network.  WikiVirus C (talk) 21:51, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The writing is promotional in tone and feel, and the magazine lacks significant notability.  TH1980 ( talk ) 03:14, 23 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
Bryce McGuire : TOOSOON seems to apply as nothing else is notable at this time in his list of accomplishments.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:43, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 14:50, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:51, 24 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
Kelly Ávalos : I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 04:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Nicaragua .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 04:03, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 18:35, 23 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:37, 23 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
Zivit Inbar : No RS.  Fails the GNG.  gidonb ( talk ) 23:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business , Israel ,  and Australia .  gidonb ( talk ) 23:39, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete orphan article that looks like a CV.  WP:NOTRESUME .  LibStar ( talk ) 23:41, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability, this is just promotional.  Fails WP:GNG among other notability cirteria, and WP:NOTCV .  LizardJr8 ( talk ) 23:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : PROMO with no sources outside of PR items or lists.  Even my searches only turn up PR items.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:57, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Authors , Businesspeople , Women ,  and Israel .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:11, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I searched for reliable sources and found no evidence of notability.  Marokwitz ( talk ) 15:13, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per norm Robertjamal12 ~🔔 16:07, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy delete : Looks just like a CV, clearly intended as promotional.  -- D'n'B - t -- 18:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Wikipedia is WP:NOTLINKEDIN .  Best, GPL93 ( talk ) 12:32, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : not notable.  Tar nis hed Path talk 08:43, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete nothing notable about the topic.  Chekidalum ( talk ) 11:30, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong delete : promotional material without any evidence of WP:GNG .  Contributor892z ( talk ) 17:21, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  It doesn't appear to be promotional - I don't see an obvious connection to the creator.  I am, however, confused why anyone would create an article about a small business owner who has no substantial legacy and has not garnered any coverage in reliable sources .  Bearian ( talk ) 17:17, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Twin Method : No chart placements, no enduring impact, fails WP:MUSICBIO, WP:BAND, WP:GNG.  Tagged since June 2020 it now needs to go.  Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 15:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and United Kingdom .  Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 15:50, 12 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete, no coverage found for this musical group, seems to have broken up in 2009.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:05, 12 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
Pete Tex : Cant find any articles on him google shows his music ie spotify, youtube videos , ect.  Questions?  four OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:37, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  Questions?  four OLIfanofmrtennant (she/her) 05:37, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Germany .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 06:16, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Association for Competitive Technology : every source in the article is primary.  ltb d l ( talk ) 08:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions .  ltb d l ( talk ) 08:27, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics , Business ,  and United States of America .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:55, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per @ Ltbdl stance.  It lacks notability and it is not yet ready for inclusion on Wikimedia.  Let's give it a year and see.  Fugabus ( talk ) 18:48, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:42, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Lacks reliable secondary sources and it does not even meet notability guidelines per WP:GNG .  It doesn't fit for an article.  ZyphorianNexus ( talk ) 12:54, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete