hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Leo Aro: He doesn't even have a portugese wiki entry.  Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 13:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football .  '''[[ User:CanonNi ]]''' ( talk | contribs ) 14:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep [36] and [37] and [38] all look like WP:SIGCOV .  I would recommend withdrawing the nomination.  Robby.is.on ( talk ) 18:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I have fleshed out the article with those sources plus some more I found since.  What do you think, @ Govvy : ?  Robby.is.on ( talk ) 21:40, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment He played for a few top teams in Brazil, Robby pointed to a few sources, but I would like to see a bit more for my liking.  Govvy ( talk ) 18:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – Per sources provided by @ Robby.is.on .  The athlete also had notable spells at SC Internacional, Lecce and Leixões.  Svartner ( talk ) 07:20, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per improvements, just squeezes by WP:BASIC for me, cheers.  Govvy ( talk ) 10:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per Govvy 's rationale. Orig nom here: with the changes this does seem to squeeze by WP:GNG now (i.e. a WP:HEY ). Although I'm not sure about [1] being independent, given he's a journo intern with a close relationship with the subject. Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 14:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] he's a journo intern with a close relationship with the subject Where did you glean that information from? Robby.is.on ( talk ) 18:09, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I read the article. Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 19:12, 20 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Of course I did, too, albeit through a translation service. I couldn't find any signs that the writer of the article had a close relationship with the subject , only that they were a supervised intern ("Estagiário, colaborou sob a supervisão de Heitor Esmeriz"). Robby.is.on ( talk ) 00:08, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Ah, I didn't see that those were quotes. Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 17:43, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:54, 20 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources above which show notability. Giant Snowman 14:06, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep relevant from my point of view -- Acartonadooopo ( talk ) 16:19, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources and per an extensive professional career. Clearly notable. Anwegmann ( talk ) 00:38, 22 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: keep
Lianozovo: TH1980 ( talk ) 04:56, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Disambiguations and Russia .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:11, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep' : A disambiguation page with two entries is perfectly valid, where neither of them is the obvious Primary Topic.  Pam D 08:42, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as per PamD .  Also, I'd like to add that Russian disambiguation page has 6 entries.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:29, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I have just merged Wikidata, so that now this disambiguation page has links to three other languages.  It is weird that there was two Wikidata for Lianozovo disambiguation page, I had to first resolve conflicts with descriptions in multiple languages and only then it allowed me to merge.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:55, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Perfectly valid DAB page.  Absolutely no need for deletion.  The nom apparently misunderstood what is stated at MOS:DAB which indicates that A disambiguation page with only two meanings is not necessary if one of them is the primary topic for that term , and since neither of the entries listed is the primary topic then the page is completely necessary.  CycloneYoris talk!  17:50, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as per PamD and CycloneYoris .  AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk ) 18:26, 17 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: keep
Southport Sockman: Mdann52 ( talk ) 14:56, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and England .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:04, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Mildly amusing anecdote, but that doesn't make it notable.  Athel cb ( talk ) 15:06, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] it's very notable locally and across merseyside and lancashire 31.94.28.139 ( talk ) 12:49, 20 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Leaning keep on this one, though the article really does need to pull it's socks up .   This was not a single incident, but rather a spree of incidents over several years - a lot of socks.   Furthermore, although the court case is reported to have been in 1998 there does appear to be WP:SUSTAINED coverage of the UK-based "sockmen", including: coverage from Canada from 1996 ( Medicine Hat News ), a 2009 article ( [19] ), a film produced in 2015/16 ( Liverpool Echo , IMDb , Mirror ), a 2017 book ( [20] ), a Connecticut radio show in 2020 ( [21] ), and a retrospective article in 2021 ( Daily Record ).  Coverage could be better, but does appear to be much more than "breaking news".  Resonant Dis tor tion 18:34, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - I have reverted the vandalism where an IP had added a third name to the perpetrators, and also added some of the above refs as citations within the article.  Resonant Dis tor tion 19:08, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I added an 'In popular culture' section to the article with talks about the film and book adaptations, with can help enforce its WP:N .  Mjks28 ( talk ) 11:21, 25 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!  17:19, 23 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep: Events described in article are notable, as they have inspired multiple media products (per @ ResonantDistortion 's argument above, such as a film). Article could, however, benefit from some rewording/restructuring, and add a section that could cover its media adaptations. — Mjks28 ( talk ) 05:52, 24 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep oh wow, I remember this happening, some of my friends were 'victims'.  Anyway, I've added some extra detail with contemporaneous references.  Orange sticker ( talk ) 23:30, 27 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: keep
Vere Claiborne Chappell: Fails WP:NPROF and WP:GNG .  - UtherSRG (talk) 15:57, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Academics and educators , Philosophy , United States of America , Massachusetts ,  and New York .  UtherSRG (talk) 15:57, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Aside from this mention [7] I'm not seeing anything else.  Timur9008 ( talk ) 20:11, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep but move to Vere Chappell , the name under which he  usually published.  A pass of WP:NPROF 1c as the subject of a festschrift , Contemporary Perspectives on Early Modern Philosophy: Essays in Honor of Vere Chappell (Broadview, 2008) [8] .  There's an obituary in Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association [9] and a number of book reviews [10] [11] [12] on JSTOR.  (Additionally, for the use of future editors, there's an obituary of his ex-wife here [13] that contains more biographical information.)  Note that the author of Sexual Outlaw, Erotic Mystic: The Essential Ida Craddock is apparently his son of the same name.  Jahaza ( talk ) 20:36, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above.  A festschrift establishes notability.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 21:53, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and move, as Jahaza suggests. -- asilvering ( talk ) 23:22, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and move.  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 00:35, 26 August 2023 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Keep and move passes WP:NPROF .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 11:02, 30 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: keep
Game Boy Advance SP: Grandmaster Huon ( talk ) 03:26, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  Kpg jhp jm 06:06, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The nominator seems to be attempting to open a merge request at AfD, saying in their nomination that they suggest merging with Game Boy Advance .  Apart from that, the idea that "few would care about" a topic is very much not an admissible argument at AfD.  jp × g 08:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , anticipating an avalanche, very clearly meets WP:GNG clicking the the "Find sources" links above.  — siro χ o 09:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Is this trolling?  Very obviously notable.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 10:17, 29 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
Faroe Islands Handball League: Nothing particular to this league returns on my BEFORE but I'm okay if someone with better google abilities in different languages is able to find coverage.  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 19:41, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports , Handball ,  and Denmark .  microbiology Marcus ( petri dish · growths ) 19:41, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:58, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , one of the main sports leagues of a small nation.  Try searching Burn-deildin as a league name together with the national internet extension site:. fo .  Geschichte ( talk ) 22:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Handball is at the Faroe Island the most popular sport.  Many articles about the league exists.  [9] 🤾‍♂️ Malo95 ( talk ) 18:44, 15 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
Veronika Dvořáková: Google searches come up with silly, random namesakes.  CuteDolphin712 ( talk ) 16:31, 3 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Handball ,  and Czech Republic .  CuteDolphin712 ( talk ) 16:31, 3 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep denik has some articles about her.  Especially this article and also idnes with this interview .  If you google <<"Veronika Dvořáková" Hazena>> there are more sources.  🤾‍♂️ Malo95 ( talk ) 18:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm going to try translate the articles and re-word myself if this nomination was kept.  However, since I knew nothing of handball-related subjects  the moment, it's admitted difficult.  CuteDolphin712 ( talk ) 10:32, 10 March 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 ) 18:05, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - the concern is absence of sources, and this is dealt with in the comments here by Malo95, so I see no enduring rationale for deletion.  Article needs improvement, not deletion.  C 679 07:08, 17 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
The Pentecostal Mission: HenryMP02 ( talk ) 19:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Christianity , Sri Lanka ,  and Tamil Nadu .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep am finding some reliable sources coverage such as this , I haven't done a full search yet, imv Atlantic306 ( talk ) 19:01, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep have added references and is a century old church founded in 1923 feel the resources will be offline.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 19:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That makes sense.  I see where you are coming from.  This is probably a case where the sources do exist, but may be difficult to find initially.  HenryMP02 ( talk ) 22:30, 20 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!  23:06, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:04, 27 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: keep
Microsoft Outlook (mobile app): No consensus to restore.  SeanJ 2007 ( talk ) 02:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  SeanJ 2007 ( talk ) 02:07, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Microsoft Outlook as before.  Aintabli ( talk ) 02:11, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:22, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The original merge was without consensus.  It’s a completely different program from the desktop app with separate history.  Just because it has the same name doesn’t mean it’s the same thing.  It’s like merging Sonic the Hedgehog (1991) with Sonic the Hedgehog (2006) -- MSMST1543 ( talk ) 17:39, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per MSMST1543.  Its established and notable history as a separate app was decimated by the merge argument that it is one and the same with the desktop software of the same name, when it is not.  ViperSnake151 Talk 02:12, 22 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!  04:06, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : For such reason, it is an acceptable fork per WP:OKFORK .  CastJared ( talk ) 15:30, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Can you clarify what you mean by "such reason"?  Dylnuge ( Talk • Edits ) 16:17, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Such article splitting.  CastJared ( talk ) 16:58, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Was there an original discussion about making a redirect here?  It's not clear to me what consensus is being circumvented, but I see that the page has been moved a few times, so maybe I'm missing an old AfD or talk page discussion?  As is right now this seems like a procedural close; I don't understand why this has been brought to AfD.  There's no arguments being made about notability here and as far as I can see this isn't a CSD G4 situation or similar.  Dylnuge ( Talk • Edits ) 17:42, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The discussion was at Talk:Microsoft Outlook/Archive 1#Merger proposal .  ThisIsSeanJ ( talk ) 23:43, 29 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
Internet (web browser): Independent sources just talk about launch of the application, but a burst of coverage (often around product announcements) does not automatically make a product notable per WP:NSOFT .  I don't think it should have a dedicated article.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet , Software ,  and India .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : It's got a full article in the Verge and the Hindustan Times, both solid sources.  I'm not sure what the issue is.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 21:03, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yeah, I looked at those and, as I said, a burst of coverage (often around product announcements) does not automatically make a product notable per WP:NSOFT .  I think it really needs more than that to merit a standalone article, but we'll see what others say.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 21:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Ok the Verge is minimal, but a solid source.  Here's TechCrunch [29] Oaktree b ( talk ) 21:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : coverage in The Verge , Hindustan Times and TechCrunch amounts to notability.  Owen× ☎ 15:07, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - While it's understandably difficult to find sources for a browser simply called "Internet", I did find some reviews in addition to the above, including in Digital Trends .  Some of them I found have a churnalism vibe to them or are sites that I'm not familiar enough with to say they're reliable, but I think what's been listed here so far does show enough notability per WP:GNG if nothing else.  - Aoidh ( talk ) 03:34, 24 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: keep
GammaFax: Non-notable product.  GabrielPenn4223 ( talk ) 23:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Technology-related deletion discussions .  GabrielPenn4223 ( talk ) 23:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Computing .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:33, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Probably notable, but this is a stub that needs more.  [1] and [2] are both fairly extensive coverage of this computer peripheral.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:41, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Per sources presented here and in the article.  Other sources: InfoWorld, volume 8, issue 35, 1.9.1986, p. 9.  InfoWorld, volume 12, issue 32, 6.8.1990, pp. 59, 62, 63, 66, 70, 71.  (comparison of several products)  PC Mag, 27.1.1987, volume 6, number 2, p. 36.  PC Mag, 28.6.1988, volume 7, number 12, pp. 190, 193, 198.  I will add this poor article to my to-do list (note playing video games takes too much of my free time).  Pavlor ( talk ) 08:36, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : I would argue that by virtue of it being the first personal computer fax board , it meets WP:GNG .  GSK ( talk • edits ) 15:13, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Significant, in-depth coverage in multiple mainstream secondary sources cited above more than meets WP:NPRODUCT.  Owen× ☎ 22:59, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - Credible claim to notability backed up by a few sources.  — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I see many non-trivial sources which can be used.  Lightburst ( talk ) 18:01, 18 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
Sam North: Appears largely as PROMO.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:09, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:09, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 15:39, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There are multiple mentions of this page elsewhere on wikipedia.  I can do some work adding citations tmcq ( talk ) 17:29, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The author was nominated for a Booker prize and won the Somerset Maugham award.  Seems pretty notable to me. tmcq ( talk ) 17:29, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep In addition to being longlisted for the Booker Prize, his novel The Unnumbered was reviewed in the Guardian [1] and the Independent [2] , and the subject of an article in The Bookseller [3] .  His novel, The Old Country is reviewed in the New Zealand Herald [4] , The Independent [5] , the The Observer [6] and the Financial Times [7] .  His novel Chapel Street was reviewed in the Los Angeles Times [8] and Kirkus [9] .  His novel The Gifting Program was reviewed in The Independent [10] .  Jahaza ( talk ) 18:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you! tmcq ( talk ) 19:25, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .   I'm not sure that longlisted for the Booker prize is enough, but I'm seeing lots of reviews of his work in the British press.  Russ Woodroofe ( talk ) 19:01, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The reviews listed above by Jahaza are enough to convince me of WP:AUTHOR notability.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 23:15, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per tmcq .  Twinkle1990 ( talk ) 08:29, 14 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