hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Chrysanthemums for a Bunch of Swine: None of these contribute to notability.  My BEFORE check just found more wikis and databases, and Google Scholar only had one result.  The articles on other Wikipedias also do not seem to have any helpful sources.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 14:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and Italy .  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 14:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I’ll improve the page today when I have more time.  Added a few things that in my view show it's notable enough for a standalone page.  The nominator’s rationale clearly shows that AT LEAST a redirect to Sergio Pastore was warranted anyway.  Strongly opposed to deletion . - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 17:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Not sure what the nom's search was, but searching a few film texts turns up a number of sources.   It's a spaghetti Western, so it is not surprisingly found in books about that topic.   I see that additional sources have been added since the nom.   I'm sure there are others (what I found already indicates that's the case).   The article needs to be expanded, but that's not a reason to delete.  Butler Blog ( talk ) 13:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw I clearly missed some things when performing my search.  The sources now in the article seem to be sufficient, and I withdraw this nomination.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 14:05, 1 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: keep
Five Mile House (Illinois): Not listed on the NRHP [21] .  Sourcing is all primary.  Appears PROMO for a tourist attraction.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:17, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Consdering the AfD posting was the third-ever edit to this new page, and the page is only sourced to primary sources, a good WP:BEFORE search is necessary and it's crystal clear this house comes up often in multiple local news sources (newspaper and television), and has been referenced in several books.  There's a chance the coverage as a whole doesn't add up to GNG, but there's definitely coverage out there, and I haven't even searched old newspapers yet.  SportingFlyer T · C 14:24, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Historical buildings don't have to be on the NRHP to be notable, and this one has plenty of coverage in non-primary sources: see [22] [23] [24] [25] [26] .  It's included in the Illinois Historic Sites Survey Inventory , though their database is under construction so finding info is a bit of a pain right now.  It's also been referenced in books, as SportingFlyer mentioned.  The article needs cleanup and better sourcing, but AfD isn't cleanup.  TheCatalyst31 Reaction • Creation 17:06, 25 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: keep
Djabrail Chahkiev: - TheLongTone ( talk ) 15:26, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Russia-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:51, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:51, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Archaeology-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:52, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Djabrail Chahkiev was a prominent Ingush historian and archeologist, had a lot of great works on Ingush towers like the monographs Drevnosti Gornoy Ingushetii .  He contributed a lot to the formation and development of archival affairs in Ingushetia being the Deputy Head of the State Archive Service of Ingushetia from 2015.  Had articles in journal Sovetskaya etnografia and in encyclopedias Narody Rossii , Narody i religii mira [ ru ] , Entsiklopediya narodov Yuga Rossii .  WikiEditor 123… 17:47, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  FWIW he is the subject of several articles in major newspapers such as Moskovsky Komsomolets [13] and AiF [14] in which his contributions to the republican archives (he was the deputy director), restoration of Ingush defence towers and a number of books are mentioned.  Alaexis ¿question?  20:46, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I think the sources posted by Alaexis and those already in the article are enough to demonstrate a likely WP:GNG pass.  The current article is primarily sourced to what appears to be (if I'm interpreting machine translations correctly) a 17-page biography in a journal published by наследие кубани "Heritage of Kuban", a Russian state-owned archeological services company.  I don't know if Chahkiev was in some way associated with this organization or if this source is fully independent.  Maybe a native speaker can shed some light.  Jfire ( talk ) 01:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Djabrail Chakhkiev, as pointed out by Jfire, was associated with research projects from Russian state-owned archeological services company "Heritage of Kuban".  Another famous work in association with famous scholars Vitaly and Yevgeny Narozhny, is "Military Archeology: Ancient and Medieval Weapons of Eurasia // Burials of spearmen of the Keliya burial ground in highland Ingushetia" (2017) [15] .  Dzhabrail Chakhkiev was an employee of the State Archive Service of the Republic of Ingushetia.  Muqale (talk) 04:26, 13 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: keep
Dorothy Steel (actress): I prefer the information about this article should be other websites like IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes.  Since those websites didn't need a big description of an article about someone.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4lepheus B4ron ( talk • contribs ) 08:59, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep An article's stubbiness is not a valid reason to delete it, and the subject passes the GNG.  – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 01:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions .  – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 01:05, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Procedural relist: AfD discussion was never transcluded to the log.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, – dudhhr talk contribs (he/they) 01:08, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep No valid reason for deletion given.  Subject passes GNG.  -- Random person no 362478479 ( talk ) 01:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Actress in major film franchise with multiple instances of whole-article coverage from major media outlets.  Easily meets WP:GNG .  Oblivy ( talk ) 06:30, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Michigan .  Shellwood ( talk ) 09:12, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep .  While most coverage arose from her death, not all of it did, and therefore she at least meets WP:BASIC and probably meets WP:GNG in my opinion.   Analysis based on existing sources in the article.  CT55555 ( talk ) 14:42, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Meets the criteria of WP:GNG .  -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 23:55, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Unquestionably meets the criteria. No good reasons to delete. The person who loves reading ( talk ) 03:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep I 100% see how this was a borderline case and even I had to go deep into Google to find them. But this annoyingly counts "technically". Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:13, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Profile in The New York Times [30] . Notable. -- Jaireeodell ( talk ) 15:19, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Borderline case but well-sourced.  She has acted in some of the most recognisable films and has minimum coverage to pass WP:GNG.  Thilsebatti ( talk ) 17:08, 21 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: keep
Dietrich Unkrodt: Current sources are either unreliable (discogs) or a funeral home (I think?).  German WP article is almost identical, as this one is a translation.  – Aza24 (talk) 19:04, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Bands and musicians ,  and Germany .  Aza24 (talk) 19:04, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The person composed and played unusual recordings for an unusual instrument, and taught, all this before the time of web coverage, and most of his career in East Germany.  metason.net Verlag Neue Musik Zerbe orchestra jazz rbb jazzzeitung.de student (and there are more) too tired to look for more -- Gerda Arendt ( talk ) 22:54, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] These are all just passing mentions though... Aza24 (talk) 23:58, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] As I said, his main career was before the internet, and in East Germany. He made recordings that were mentioned decades later, which tells me to keep. [15] . Perhaps SusunW can dig up newspapers? Anyway, I'll have no time for him today, but promise to look tomorrow. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk ) 06:33, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , noting I was called here by Gerda Arendt .  As she said likely many off-line sources.  East German, allowed to tour the US and internationally, was really unusual.  [16] , [17] , [18] , VP of the Tuba International Brotherhood Association, the inaugural VP .  There are also bits [19] , [20] , [21] , [22] , and then there is this [23] "Concerto for Tuba and Orchestra" by Joachim Gunner  (p 131, 133), "Sieben Miniaturen für Vier Tuben" by Gunter Kochan (p 226); and Fanfare for a Friend by John Stevens (p 254) were all written for Unkrodt.  Book also includes people he taught.  Would need input from someone who has access to a library (I don't, but possibly the RX, where I've ordered .) to see the bios here: "Dietrich Unkrodt studied at the Berlin Conservatory from 1952-1955 and was a member of Landeskapelle" (p 28), "Dietrich Unkrodt of the tuba jury displayed musical and instrumental vision which went far beyond the standard limits…He showed an adventurousness and determination to extend the limits of the tuba…" p 44.  Clearly notable from other musicians' perspectives from what I can see.  Has a bio Kürschners Musiker-Handbuch, p. 487.  SusunW ( talk ) 13:45, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , much improved, clearly shows notability now.  — Kusma ( talk ) 16:13, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as there is multiple reliable sources coverage such as a number of books identified in this discussion so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 ( talk ) 23:02, 21 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: keep
Yemisi Ransome-Kuti: Shellwood ( talk ) 14:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep or draftify for improvement.  I see press coverage stretching back years in a Google news search and a Google book search, enough to suggest a strong GNG pass.  Our current article is not well written but deletion is not cleanup and the subject seems notable.  Mccapra ( talk ) 20:29, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:40, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Specific source assessment would be helpful.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, NotAGenious ( talk ) 14:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : BEFORE suggests that this passes GNG, also, indeed, AfD isn't for articles that just need cleanup.  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 14:31, 4 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: keep
Anbe Vaa (TV series): Tirishan ( talk ) 19:53, 4 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Soft Delete or Keep The show is still airing.  There may be important updates in the future. -- P.Karthik.95 ( talk ) 10:02, 10 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Source 1 is routine coverage that talks about an actress' participation in the serial Source 2 is routine coverage that talks about an actress' participation in the serial Source 3 is routine coverage on the serial starting Source 4 is tabloid coverage spammed with actor pictures and is about the serial starting Source 5 is routine updates on actor joining Source 6 is routine updates on actress leaving This is all mainly starting fluff/hype, and coverage does not extend to this point in time. Please elaborate on these 'important updates' too. None of this shows how the serial is notable for Wikipedia Karnataka ( talk ) 15:55, 10 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 09:16, 12 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! 23:42, 19 June 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! 22:42, 26 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep We don't seem to have a straightforward guide on soaps. All I can find is Wikipedia:WikiProject Soap Operas#Notability standards . That  makes some reference to coverage of soaps. Ultimately, we need to understand that the way media covers soaps is different than the way media covers other TV shows or film, it's all character and cast updates and so on. There seems to be what amounts to SIGCOV for a soap in Tamil language in The Indian Express , which is reliable per WP:ICTFSOURCES — siro χ o 00:55, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , I think some participants above may be overinterpreting WP:SIGCOV , which states "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. In other words, significant coverage does not mean extraordinary or remarkable coverage, it just means coverage that has enough depth that it can be used as source material without violating WP:NOR . I am a bit confused by the above discussion of sources, as there are currently only three cited in the article and on review of the history it doesn't seem that any have been removed. But taking it as given that at least six such sources exist, it seems like this would comfortably meet the GNG. Moreover, I think it meets the GNG even if relying only on the sources adduced above and in the article. -- Visviva ( talk ) 01:21, 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: keep
Lighthouse Beach, New South Wales: I couldn't find any sources either.  EternalNub ( talk ) 17:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions .  EternalNub ( talk ) 17:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:04, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] * WP:PROD would have been good for this.  Australia has lots of beaches, without sources Delete Reywas92 Talk 18:23, 24 May 2024 (UTC) Struck per HEY Reywas92 Talk 16:47, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Plenty of sources available, and it's a WP:GEOFEAT so doesn't need to specifically clear the GNG bar: [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] Needs adoption, not deletion.  SportingFlyer T · C 18:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I've added several references, an infobox, and prose to the article.  (I've left the "doesn't meet GNG" box up until this AfD is closed - if the closer could please remove it.)  SportingFlyer T · C 07:35, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Have also added a few sources.  Expect more could be done on the shark attack aspect by those with access to better Australian sources than I. Pickersgill-Cunliffe ( talk ) 12:03, 27 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: keep
Charade (1953 film): I found no reviews on Rotten Tomatoes ] and only passing mentions on Newspapers.com .   I continued my WP:BEFORE and found a capsule review from Leonard Maltin via Google Books , and capsule reviews are considered “insufficient to fully establish notability” per NFSOURCES.  The Film Creator ( talk ) 03:56, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  The Film Creator ( talk ) 03:56, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Well there's all of the stuff about this film in Hirschhorn 1977 , pp. 26, 108–110 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFHirschhorn1977 ( help ) to start with.   And maybe Morley 1989 , p. 89 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFMorley1989 ( help ) has something about this.  Craddock 2000 , p. 195 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFCraddock2000 ( help ) has an entry.   Then there are detail sources like Barlow 2004 , p. 83 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFBarlow2004 ( help ) .  Uncle G ( talk ) 10:52, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hirschhorn, Clive (1977).  The Films of James Mason .  Citadel Press.  ISBN 9780806505848 .  Morley, Sheridan (1989).  James Mason: Odd Man Out .  Orion Publishing Group.  ISBN 9780297793236 .  Craddock, Jim (2000).  "Charade".  Video Hounds Golden Movie Retrievee: The Complete Guide to Movies on Videocassette, DVD and Laserdisc .  Visible Ink Press.  ISBN 9781578591206 .  Barlow, Aaron (2004).  The DVD Revolution: Movies, Culture, and Technology .  Bloomsbury Publishing USA.  ISBN 9780313024535 .  To which one can at least add Focus on Film Films in Review So obviously Keep !  - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 13:13, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I would be shocked if we're getting rid of any part of James Mason's filmography.  Kazamzam ( talk ) 15:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Per WP:NFIC : "The film features significant involvement [...] by a notable person and is a major part of their career."  James Mason played one of the leads in all three segments and was also producer and writer.  -- Bensin ( talk ) 23:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I withdraw per consensus.  The Film Creator ( talk ) 10:01, 20 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: keep
Mark L. Ascher: Ktkvtsh ( talk ) 22:41, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Academics and educators .  Ktkvtsh ( talk ) 22:41, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Simply being an orphan for a long time is not a valid rationale for deletion.  The subject appears to pass WP:NPROF #5 as a named chair (actually, multiple named chairs).  Curbon7 ( talk ) 22:50, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and improve, the subject of the article meets notability criteria for professors per Curbon7's note above.  It seems they have two named chairs.  Netherzone ( talk ) 23:09, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  In addition to the above, this guy is so known in his field that his textbook is named after him ( Scott and Ascher on Trusts ).  -- asilvering ( talk ) 00:49, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as above.  The nominator, who has been editing for less than two months, might like to study WP:Before .  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 04:54, 24 September 2023 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:59, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Being an orphan is no grounds for deletion.  As others have pointed out the multiple named chairs meet WP:PROF.  Espresso Addict ( talk ) 21:03, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I fleshed out the article some.  Still needs work.  A Google search turned up wide coverage, including in law reviews.  Meets notability criteria for professors as cited above and passes WP:GNG .  - AuthorAuthor ( talk ) 22:56, 24 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The discussion above is closed.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion outcome: keep