hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Krystian Gergella: Might be a redirect ATD to List of Lechia Gdańsk records and statistics oir List of Lechia Gdańsk players .  Geschichte ( talk ) 19:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Poland-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:05, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:05, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:05, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:06, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Per WP:NOTMEMORIAL .  There is no historical relevance as in the case of the Liverpool player discussed a few days ago.  I also don't see the point in creating a redirect for statistics.  Svartner ( talk ) 02:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 20:51, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per WP:NOTMEMORIAL Mr Vili talk 00:41, 28 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
EBay API: While eBay is obviously notable, it's not clear that its API is.  The article itself is extremely support with little more than a feature list, and the only sources are eBay itself.  I would suggest merging into eBay but its really not obvious what the notability of this is--lots of websites have APIs.  TheRealOj32 ( talk ) 06:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails GNG.  As per nom, there are tons of APIs out there, and there's nothing showing this one is notable.  Discant X 06:55, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions .  Cleo Cooper ( talk ) 06:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 25 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Due to lack of WP:RS coverage.  There are notable APIs like Google APIs .  GobsPint ( talk ) 00:12, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] To play devil's advocate (on my own AfD), every link on Google APIs is from Google, AKA only primary sources.  Would you really consider that to follow WP:RS ?  TheRealOj32 ( talk ) 05:48, 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
Invasions of Kiratpur: Sources like the Suraj Granth and Macaullife were explicitly deprecated here- [12] .  Harinder Singh Mehboob's work is self published and the author is a poet, not a historian.  Southasianhistorian8 ( talk ) 12:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  The sources are Raj-era or self-published on Xlibris.  Nothing reliably sourced enough to merge into the page on Kiratpur. — Moriwen ( talk ) 15:37, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Military ,  and India .  Shellwood ( talk ) 18:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:28, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Punjab-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:56, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Page should have 2-3 reliable sources to contemplate but this page has none with WP:RAJ era sources and a self published one.  RangersRus ( talk ) 20:15, 12 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: delete
Radoniaina Rabemanantsoa: No indication of notability.  Unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:44, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:08, 15 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 14:23, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , I couldn't find sources to pass WP:GNG .  Suonii180 ( talk ) 12:42, 22 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
WBXP-LP: Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 16:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Tennessee .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 16:20, 7 January 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!  08:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Subject does not have the WP:SIGCOV needed to meet the WP:GNG .  Let'srun ( talk ) 04:57, 18 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
J. P. International School: No coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL .  LibStar ( talk ) 00:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Uttar Pradesh .  LibStar ( talk ) 00:46, 8 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:10, 8 September 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!  00:47, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - lacks references to support; but allow draft refund if the author wants to continue editing.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 04:39, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I found some very glancing mentions on a database search; nothing that demonstrates sigcov, but a REFUND for the author might allow something to incubate.  Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 20:05, 20 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
Ri Kum-chol (footballer, born unknown): Simione001 ( talk ) 01:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 01:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 01:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 01:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Well, the unknown birthdate person has no coverage at all, surprise surprise.  Delete for a lack of sourcing.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 06:08, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails per WP:V .  Svartner ( talk ) 23:22, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:31, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – no coverage.  Idiosincrático ( talk ) 17:42, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:08, 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: delete
Gwrite: HyperAccelerated ( talk ) 01:09, 5 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Internet and Software .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:37, 5 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  00:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : All I find are social media and download sites, not seeing anything for software notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Already PROD'd so not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  00:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The "incomplete" comment in the 2017 PROD may have been a bit unfair, in that it is not uncommon for text editing software to be released then improved, but while there are occasional mentions of gsoft text editor in Linux forums etc., I am not seeing coverage to demonstrate attained notability , nor an appropriate target .  AllyD ( talk ) 12:43, 19 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: delete
Economic repression in the Soviet Union: The result of the discussion was delete .  Nevertheless, the article has been recreated.  There is barely any indication of any improvement in the article from the previous version—while this version is very slightly longer and does use a handful of sources (the previous version used none), it does not substantively address or remedy the issues raised in the previous AfD (and is in fact inherently unable to do so).  The main criticisms from the previous discussion were: The article is pretending to be a wide-ranging article, which it is not (as per @ Peterkingiron ).  As before, the article purports to be about "economic repression" in general but its grand total of 7 sentences (that's it; that's the whole article) are entirely about Dekulakization and the Holodomor , already covered at length by existing articles.  This is not a term used in the literature either of mainstream economic history or of Marxism...  A generalized treatment under the topic head we have here, at least at this point, would be overreach verging on Original Research.  (as per @ Carrite ).  This was was true then, is still true now.  The article was

Discussion outcome: delete
Voleo: Shellwood ( talk ) 09:21, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 29 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I would say it is likely that there are no sources meeting all four criteria.  Nothing relevant in standard BEFORE or ProQuest.  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 09:58, 2 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
Chandrikayilaliyunna Chandrakantham: Sources in article and found in BEFORE are routine mill news, listings, annoucements, promo, nothing that meets WP:SIRS addressing the subject directly and indepth.  // Timothy :: talk 01:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:13, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Asianet News Malayalam is somewhat associated or connected with the subject as the series is airing on Asianet but doesn't provide in-depth coverage.  Times of India contributes zero to establishing notability.  Other sources, such as Indian Express Malayalam , don’t provide much coverage of the subject, and lastly, Mediainfoline and KeralaTv seem unreliable to me.  No critical reviews found.  Fails WP:GNG and WP:FILM .  Grabup ( talk ) 05:25, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Per nom.  Fails WP:NTV .  Serial is not played for broader regional or national audience and airs in only one local media market that does not make it notable.  RangersRus ( talk ) 13:42, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] by that logic every local language serial should be deleted Mirinda1234 ( talk ) 15:50, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Sara Hradecky: As always, diplomats are not "inherently" notable just because they exist, and must be shown to pass WP:GNG on reliable source coverage and analysis about the significance and impact of their work -- but this is "referenced" entirely to content self-published by Global Affairs Canada (i.e. her own employer) rather than any evidence of third parties writing about her as a subject.  Bearcat ( talk ) 13:02, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , Women ,  and Canada .  Bearcat ( talk ) 13:02, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Kenya , Vietnam , United Arab Emirates ,  and Mexico .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:56, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Coverage I found in gnews merely confirms her role but it's not WP:SIGCOV about her that would meet WP:BIO .  Ambassadors are not inherently notable.  LibStar ( talk ) 00:38, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , Per nominator.  DarkHorseMayhem ( talk ) 22:46, 17 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
Diana Pinto: Sources are only about her becoming Miss India America, which is WP:BLP1E at best.  Let'srun ( talk ) 00:00, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Women , Beauty pageants ,  and United States of America .  Let'srun ( talk ) 00:00, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Maharashtra-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:32, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:32, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:32, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:33, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The article fails WP:GNG and is a case of WP:BLP1E .  As for references, the first is borked and the rest are passing mentions.  After a quick search, I was able to find some more passing mentions.  Yippie!  IncompA 20:02, 17 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Due to WP:BIO1E .  MrsSnoozyTurtle 03:37, 19 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
Vesta, Indiana: Baird mentions it in passing several times, once calling it a town and once referring to the post office, but doesn't say anything about it directly.  A bank plat map of the county from 1918 shows the name, but there's nothing there but several farms.  Mangoe ( talk ) 18:43, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:15, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete A postoffice [5] .  I've found nothing but that source that specifically addresses the nature of the area called Vesta.  James.folsom ( talk ) 22:59, 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
Inform version history: Appropriate material is already present in Inform .  List is an unneeded CFORK.  No objection to a consensus redirect.  // Timothy :: talk 05:41, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per nom.  Toadette ( let's chat together ) 06:47, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing and Lists .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:59, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Inform as ATD.  I don't believe the history needs deleting, and it could be helpful when updating the target.  — siro χ o 10:28, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per Siroxo , although I have doubts about the usefulness of the history.  Owen× ☎ 14:48, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per WP:NOTCHANGELOG .  Do not redirect - it would be deceptive anyway if there is no version history in the target.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 17:16, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete without redirecting, per nom and NOTCHANGELOG and similar.   Claiming that the edit history of this might benefit the proposed redirect target is beyond implausible.  35.139.154.158 ( talk ) 03:29, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Redirect can be created even if article is deleted.  Georgethedragonslayer ( talk ) 14:45, 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
Todd Bowie: While this guy may have worked as a tech with many big names, notability is WP:NOTINHERITED .   There are no sources in the article supporting these assertions either.  The only source I could find was a Madison.com article behind a paywall that I can't access.   The article about his band was deleted in Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Karlz .  CSD#A7 declined because someone saw some kind of an assertion of importance.  Toddst1 ( talk ) 21:43, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:16, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I couldn’t find any significant WP:RS coverage and this person appears to fail the WP:Notable test.  Vote to delete.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 03:02, 15 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
List of Jeepney TV acquired programming: Wikipedia is not a TV guide.  // Timothy :: talk 02:04, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- Clearly notable as a list.  We have articles like this for dozens of networks.  I know OTHERSTUFF isn't usually a winning AfD position, but in this case it is.  If you disagree try nominating e.g. List of HBO original programming for deletion.  Central and Adams ( talk ) 03:37, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Lists ,  and Philippines .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Per WP:NOTTVGUIDE .  Programming lists are exclusively original programming, not acquired programming.  Ajf773 ( talk ) 10:03, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] How does this apply to acquired programming but not original?  It doesn't make the distinction at all.  In fact it specifically excluded lists of historical programming, which is what this article is.  Central and Adams ( talk ) 10:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Wikipedia isn't a TV guide, and the subject does not meet the WP:LISTN as the entries are not described as a group in secondary sources.  Let'srun ( talk ) 14:58, 26 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
Kilanhai River: It is violates WP:NOT.  Grahaml35 ( talk ) 12:58, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:32, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Well, I've found this , but that's definitely not enough and the length of the article is just ridiculously small.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:36, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Uttar Pradesh .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:31, 19 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy delete – No sources, and the article would have been speedily deleted under A1.  Toadette ( Happy holiday! ) 07:24, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I was only able to find one source that even mentions this river, there might be sources but if there are they are not in English.  Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:59, 21 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