hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Davie Armour: Dougal18 ( talk ) 15:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Scotland .  AllyD ( talk ) 15:24, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:36, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Are you sure?  something behind this paywall.  picking up injury after injury ...?  Played in the Scottish League semi final, [35] , A couple of hits in the Scottish press?  Not sure, but it's possible there is enough for basic GNG with a newspaper search.  I am willing to have faith on the amount of football he has played to be GNG worthy.  Govvy ( talk ) 23:07, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment In rangersreview he is briefly mentioned.  The story about Neilston is a different Davie Armour.  I looked in the archives and only found mentions in match reports.  Dougal18 ( talk ) 11:59, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 20:03, 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: delete
Bob Kuhn: No sources found to indicate that the subject meets WP:GNG or WP:NPOL .  Previously nominated in the 48-article bundle at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fidel Vargas , closed as procedural keep due to the bundle's size.  AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk ) 05:00, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:47, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:47, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 05:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 21:49, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , the secondary sources are mostly WP:ROTM for any local politician and not enough to establish WP:NOTABILITY , while there are two articles from the LA Times about the city using the insurance company he co-owns and the conflict of interest investigation being closed , I don't think that constitutes significant coverage per WP:POLITICIAN .  Shaws username ( talk ) 16:09, 12 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
Vusal Gasimli: The subject has not been covered by independent reliable sources.  The subject has headed several non-notable government-created research institutions in Azerbaijan.  The article, which is written like a resume, was authored by a likely COI account.  Thenightaway ( talk ) 14:19, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Economics ,  and Azerbaijan .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:36, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  This article seems to rest on WP:PROF or WP:AUTHOR but I don't see evidence of notability through either.  His book Geo-economics has only 24 citations on Google scholar and the rest of his publications fewer, too little for WP:PROF#C1 .  And I didn't find the multiple published book reviews of multiple books that would be needed for author notability.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 08:18, 6 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
Rafael Sciani: All I could find was passing mentions, empty stats pages and non-independent sources: [6] Angelo ( talk ) 23:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football .  Angelo ( talk ) 23:33, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:24, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:51, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 21:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete lacks indepth coverage fails WP:GNG . -- Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 12:14, 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
Ronald L. Ellis: .  "not inherently notable" and per consensus at WP:Articles for deletion/Margaret J. Schneider Snickers2686 ( talk ) 21:55, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions .  Snickers2686 ( talk ) 21:55, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 23:20, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Found some passing mentions about this person, but nothing more.  Subject does not pass WP:JUDGE or WP:GNG .  User:Let'srun 01:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Subject meets GNG and JUDGE.  Kojavak ( talk ) 01:20, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Magistrate judge with no other claim to notability.  Fails both JUDGE and GNG: no independent, significant , coverage of them. -- Jasper Deng (talk) 01:48, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above.  - Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 16:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Waxi's: Single ref makes no mention of this being a chain.  TheLongTone ( talk ) 14:38, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink , Companies ,  and Philippines .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:10, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete GNews search confirms that it is not a chain yet as this is the first ever branch .  The only hits were news blurbs that it opened last 24 April 2024.   -- Lenticel ( talk ) 13:03, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - seems like a case of WP:TOOSOON .  Lady of Shalott 13:32, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - With only 1 citation it doesn't pass notability guidelines.  Yolandagonzales ( talk ) 20:31, 1 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
Alexis Beucler: No secondary sources found in the article or elsewhere.  Let'srun ( talk ) 15:27, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Sportspeople , Women ,  and Ohio .  Let'srun ( talk ) 15:22, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Lots of unsourced and possibly WP:NOR info.  Fails WP:GNG .  GuardianH ( talk ) 19:20, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Hasn't really seemed to have done much.  KatoKungLee ( talk ) 02:33, 30 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Fails WP:GNG .  Whitemancanjump23 ( talk ) 11:02, 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: delete
November 2023 Balochistan Security Checkpoint Attack: Draftifying to give the creator a chance to correct this had no result.  Basically, we have an infobox and background section about a different event, we have one source which when one actually checks it out doesn't even mention the event, and another source not about this attack at all.  So this is an unsourced and due to the lack of concrete info for me unverifiable article.  If it can be verified, shown to be notable, and cleaned, fine (that's why I draftified it), but if not it needs to be deleted.  Fram ( talk ) 16:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Terrorism ,  and Pakistan .  Fram ( talk ) 16:04, 23 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or draftify per nominator; the sources cited do not specifically mention any security checkpoint attack, and I couldn't find anything else that specific (other than the broader 2023 attacks), so fails WP:V .   I would reconsider if other sources, perhaps in other languages, could be provided.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 15:28, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] As said per the respected user i have added More sources to make the article reliable Rahim231 ( talk ) 16:40, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete -- This is a perfectly valid news event, but not an encyclopaedic subject. The sources are valid, but they simply report that it happened which does not clear the threshold for WP:EVENTCRIT . There is no secondary analysis of the event, and draftify won't change that. Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 15:50, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete -- per above.  Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 08:53, 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
Extra Ordinary Man: Donald D23 talk to me 00:37, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India .  Donald D23 talk to me 00:37, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Upcoming film and the articles does not show how the production itself it notable, failing WP:NFF .   As a draft already exists, this article should be deleted and editing continued on the draft until it's accepted by a reviewer or the film is released.  Ravensfire ( talk ) 03:13, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Poorly developed.  So is the draft, and once it improves it can be moved to this space.  Kailash29792 (talk) 11:43, 16 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
Juan Bottaro: There is no significant coverage available; just routine match reports and contract announcements like this .  Article fails WP:GNG .  Jogurney ( talk ) 00:56, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Argentina .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:58, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:13, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per article creator who has nominated it for deletion.  Checked ProQuest and got 4 hits, including 2 in La Nación but all of them were mentions in match reports (he scored 2 goals in a Libertadores Cup match) or other articles (1 where his name was listed as one of the protegés of Juan Carlos Pírez; another mentioning his departure from Arsenal).  Cielquiparle ( talk ) 17:50, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 11:31, 23 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
Earth Rights Institute: Coverage is very scarce.  MarioGom ( talk ) 09:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Environment ,  and California .  MarioGom ( talk ) 09:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Ivory Coast , Senegal ,  and Pennsylvania .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 11:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Not eligible for soft-deletion (due to contested prod back in 2006 (!) ...) Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 10:48, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Article has existed since 2005 but till this moment has cited no single source to demonstrate notability.  Searched for sources to support it and prevent its deletion but found nothing tangible.  Metroick ( talk ) 12:32, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No reliable sources.  This should have been deleted when nominated for speedy deletion in 2006 – an editor removed the G11 template without explanation and the article appears to have languished without sources or notability since then.  Dan • ✉ 21:59, 14 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
Jonathan Miller (footballer): Unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  This was all I was able to find, if it is in fact the same person.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:11, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Bahamas .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:11, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 11:04, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 11:05, 23 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
Better Together (programme): Overall a low-quality article Elshad ( talk ) 18:17, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions .  Elshad ( talk ) 18:17, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness and Medicine .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:48, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as non-notable.  There does not appear to be any analysis or academic discussion about this programme, although the signal-to-noise ration on search results makes a definitive statement impractical.  Since the article has been moribund for a decade and no new sources appear to exist (I can't even confirm whether the programme still exists, or when it might have ended), I think deletion is the only choice.  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 13:25, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - The lack of coverage of this seems to suggest limited notability at the time and no lasting notability.  Dunarc ( talk ) 22:03, 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
Altaf Dadasaheb Shaikh: Initial version had claims of all sorts of fictitious awards, but the only one he seems to have received is for the "London Book of World Records", clearly a paid vanity award [23] , [24] , [25] .  The only film he seems to have released so far is Veda BF , which likewise appears to fail WP:NFILM, so I'll bundle that into this deletion discussion.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 09:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 09:52, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I am also nominating the following related pages because it fails WP:NFILM, with no significant coverage in reliable sources: Veda BF ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 09:56, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Film: Veda BF ...I deproDed the page after the redirect I had made was reverted.  I still think redirect to List_of_Marathi_films_of_2018#January_–_March (where it is mentioned with a source) is a good solution but also rather oppose deletion.  Director: I don't think it is a good idea to bundle the film with its director.  So, for the director, for procedural reason (I'd rather wait for the film's Afd to be closed and to see if it is considered notable enough or not, before deciding), keep for now. - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 12:04, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:NFILMMAKER .  For the film, redirect as above as it fails WP:NFILM Donald D23 talk to me 13:53, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete for failing WP:NFILMMAKER , redirect film as per DonaldD23.  Kazamzam ( talk ) 12:39, 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
Mouse Mischief: Fails WP:NPRODUCT and WP:GNG .  - UtherSRG (talk) 17:10, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products , Education ,  and Software .  UtherSRG (talk) 17:10, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  There is no indication that this relatively minor feature is notable independently from its parent programme.  Actualcpscm scrutinize , talk 20:51, 25 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
Oil Spill Response: None of the sources are both independednt and reliable and discuss the company.  No doubt  an emminently worthwhile company , but searches failed to find appropriate sources.  The sort of company that probably has a low public profile.  At present this fails WP:GNG but would be happy to be proved wrong if suitable sources can be found.  Velella Velella Talk 07:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  Velella Velella Talk 07:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Environment ,  and Aviation .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 11:50, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:52, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - total lack of WP:SIGCOV .  Bearian ( talk ) 16:23, 27 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
Alyssa Rubino: She did get one hit of magazine coverage in 2011 when she released her debut single, but getting one magazine feature isn't "inherently" notable in and of itself, and nothing else of significance has happened to her career since.  This article is so outdated, in fact, that it still refers to the debut album that was forthcoming in 2011 in the future tense even though said album never happened -- and while she has released a few independent singles in the 2020s according to the Google, I can find absolutely no evidence that any of them accomplished anything noteworthy enough to secure passage of NMUSIC.  There just isn't anything of enduring permanent note here.  Bearcat ( talk ) 05:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Canada .  Bearcat ( talk ) 05:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 11:49, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom and the one feature mentioned in the nom has no attributed author (Billboard Staff, see also ProQuest 849266612 ) so questionable RS.  S0091 ( talk ) 17:48, 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