hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Specialty Hospital, Jordan : The only sources here are press releases, the hospital's self-written description, and some kind of advertorial.  I can't find much online for this case.  Cleo Cooper ( talk ) 01:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Jordan .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:17, 23 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Leaning delete per WP:SIGCOV and WP:TNT .  It's big enough - over 210 beds - to be notable, but this barely referenced article is a mess.  Bearian ( talk ) 20:12, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Mr. SOS : Enahnced some, but recreation of previously deleted subject.  Mikeblas ( talk ) 19:41, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , California ,  and Florida .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:27, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : An article that doesn't meet WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV .  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  08:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete for want of WP:SIGCOV and a WP:BLP violation: WP:SALT .  First off, there is a total lack of significant coverage.  Producers are not automatically notable , and I just don't see much of anything in secondary sources.  We have long ago agreed that producers are run of the mill , and I don't see that consensus changing soon .  In terms of content, much is placed on his divorce; there is no evidence that his ex-wife and children are notable or public figures.  This is a second creation after deletion, which warrants a creation protection, absent very good reasons.  Bearian ( talk ) 15:32, 3 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
Systemic vulnerability : Love, Cassie.  ( Talk to me! ) 14:50, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions .  Love, Cassie.  ( Talk to me! ) 14:50, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I found this [6] .  Maybe it helps?  Conyo14 ( talk ) 04:19, 25 May 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!  23:45, 30 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Relying on a single source is the very definition of original research , for which we have never been the appropriate forum .  Bearian ( talk ) 15:19, 4 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
Portable Film Festival : Only reference doesn't work now, and others I could find are WP:SELFPUB .  TLA (talk) 11:04, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film , Events ,  and Australia .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 11:07, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Clearly fails GNG.  LibStar ( talk ) 11:54, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Carried out my own search, and fails WP:GNG , with no significant coverage able to be found.  Spinifex&Sand ( talk ) 23:08, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No appropriate sources used and no more notable coverage to be found.  Thebookstamper ( talk ) 12:57, 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
Parkinson's Europe : Maintenance tag since 2014.  Qcne (talk) 21:38, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  Qcne (talk) 21:38, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Belgium .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:24, 18 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
Anarchy Club : I am not convinced it is enough to meet WP:NBAND or WP:GNG .  Boleyn ( talk ) 20:09, 4 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Massachusetts .  Shellwood ( talk ) 20:54, 4 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:59, 4 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:38, 11 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
Braepark, Edinburgh : Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:13, 7 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep unlike Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Westfield, Edinburgh this is an OS settlement [1] and is in the Gazetteer for Scotland.  Crouch, Swale ( talk ) 16:56, 8 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] delete we don't just keep every name on an official map in the US and I see no reason not to do the same in the UK.  Searches give no indication of any notability; almost everything is a real estate listing or routine governmental material.  Mangoe ( talk ) 03:39, 9 August 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!  16:34, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Don't think WP:GEOLAND applies as although populated there is lack of evidence of it being legally recognised.  Did consider a redirect/merge to Cramond as it was /(is?) in that parish; however that article concentrates on the coastal Cramond village and looks fairly self-contained.  Braepark to the south of Cramond village appears to be the name now in use for the area of an historic estate called Braehead.  The article could be expanded with detail on the Braehead Estate [2] , the Cramond Old  Bridge [3] and the Braehead Mains statue [4] .  The article would also be a good reciprocal link to William Houison Craufurd of Braehead.  In summary, there's definite potential for this article from a historical angle so I believe a Keep opinion is justified.  (If there was nothing to expand the article with and Braepark was merely a modern housing estate on former agricultural land, I would have !voted delete.)  Rupples ( talk ) 23:31, 20 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Taken a further look at this and decided to withdraw Keep ! vote.   AFAICS Edinburgh Council do not refer to Braepark as a separate neighbourhood.  The historical interest features I referred to above are included within a part of Cramond Conservation Area named Cramond Brig. The name "Braepark" only seems to be referenced in property sales.  GNG is not satisfied for the name "Braepark".  May be best to add the historical detail to Cramond after all.  Not sure even a redirect for "Braepark"  is required.  Rupples ( talk ) 03:45, 21 August 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!  23:35, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Not legally recognized so fails WP:GEOLAND , cannot find SIRS sources so fails WP:GNG .  C LYDE TALK TO ME / STUFF DONE 05:02, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No coverage in any news or reliable source except for real estate listing.  Fails WP:GNG .  — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaribbeanKing ( talk • contribs ) 15:04, 22 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
FunnyFest Calgary Comedy Festival : A search for sources such as gnews and gbooks yields little.  Even searching through Canada's national broadcaster ["FunnyFest Calgary Comedy Festival" site:.cbc.ca] .  Fails GNG LibStar ( talk ) 05:09, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and Canada .  LibStar ( talk ) 05:09, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Arts and Entertainment .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:18, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Article is not reliably sourced as getting the topic over WP:GNG or WP:NEVENT , and even on a ProQuest search for older sourcing that might not have Googled I'm mainly just getting glancing namechecks of its existence, in arts listing calendars and articles about individual comedians, rather than substantive coverage about it.  Bearcat ( talk ) 16:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Not impressed with a list of totally unsourced achievements.  There are various well-attended festivals in Calgary that don't justify articles, this should be among them.  4.16.149.14 ( talk ) 21:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - echoing sentiments above.  grungaloo ( talk ) 21:03, 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
Bhagwan Ahir : Not enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG .  Onel 5969 TT me 10:46, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Crime ,  and Uttar Pradesh .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:29, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Kris Krull : Let'srun ( talk ) 00:42, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Women , Beauty pageants ,  and New York .  Let'srun ( talk ) 00:42, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Due to WP:BIO1E .  MrsSnoozyTurtle 09:47, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Clear-cut case of WP:BLP1E .  IncompA 22:07, 10 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:NTEMP sub-category of WP:N Graywalls ( talk ) 03:48, 14 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
Peterson Okopi : Awards are practically non-notable awards.  Most of the sources are also sponsored post or PR piece.  Jamiebuba ( talk ) 11:56, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Bands and musicians ,  and Nigeria .  Jamiebuba ( talk ) 11:56, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Ref 1, 3 and 10 are either interviews or trivial.  Person looks notable, I'll look at the other sources.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 12:09, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Only other good sources per sourcebot 16, 17 and 23 are trivial coverage.  Rest are mix of biographies or lists of simple appearances on tv shows.  The award might be notable, but I don't think we have enough for notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:51, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Individual is a notable Nigerian gospel artist with several hit songs.  Also, the awards are very renowned for gospel musicians.  Mevoelo ( talk ) 13:14, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : While I am sympathetic to the creating editor's view that Okopi is a fish in a specialised pond, WP:NMUSIC does not really allow for that.   When this is accompanied with references that are interviews, announcements and churnalism I can only consider this to be WP:ADMASQ , failing WP:GNG , certainly as written and referenced.  It is perfectly reasonable to seek to rescue it under WP:HEY .  If that happens I hope to be notified so that I may have the option of reconsidering my view 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:33, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Okopi is a highly notable gospel artist in Nigeria as earlier stated.  If you review the references properly, you’d see that most of them are actually reliable.  Talking about churnalism, I don’t think that applies here because according to  “WP:MUSIC”, Criteria for musicians…. he clearly meets 1,2,4,6,8,9,10,12.  He was a finalist of a major kids competition in Nigeria (9) and has a hit single “Osuba” which is known by almost all Nigerian Christians (2).  But I’d do my best to see if I can add more content to further show notability.  Mevoelo ( talk ) 12:59, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, but we don't have extensive sourcing for much of any of it.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:52, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : for lack of sourcing, only brief mentions.  Most articles are less then half a page.  They are in good sources, yes, but they don't go into much detail at all about the person.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 13:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - non-notable topic, sources are unreliable and most not independent.  The awards cited are unclear.  Best, Reading Beans ( talk ) 20:26, 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
Bharti-Bharat-Kamdi : Never elected to any political office that can make them inherently notable, and being a candidate from a political party for the upcoming election does not make them notable either.  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 20:13, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians , India ,  and Maharashtra .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:12, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Once again, a non-elected individual, this article was created solely due to the general election 2024 in India.  The person does not meet WP:NPOL criteria as he has never been elected as an MP or MLA.  Furthermore, he does not meet WP:GNG standards as the sources only provide passing mentions of his candidacy.  Grab Up - Talk 10:37, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Contesting for a candidacy is not notable.  Per nom.  Fails WP:NPOL .  The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician is not enough to warrant a page on the subject.  Fails WP:GNG .  RangersRus ( talk ) 13:02, 16 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
Velo Vie : There is a review on one of their bicycles but it seems to be more about the bike than the company, barely counting as one source.  Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs ) 16:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Arizona .  Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs ) 16:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:43, 3 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : hardly any coverage [2] , this is all I can find.  Nothing else, no mentions of the company.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:21, 4 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft-deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 22:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per nom and Oaktree b .  Owen× ☎ 23:53, 10 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
List of the largest municipalities in New York : For some reason it excludes villages from " municipalities " but includes towns, which are minor civil divisions .  Apocheir ( talk ) 00:58, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography , United States of America ,  and New York .  Apocheir ( talk ) 00:58, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  It seems obvious that the purpose of this WP:POVFORK is to highlight the fact that certain towns in Long Island are larger than other municipalities in New York, such as Buffalo, Yonkers, Rochester and Syracuse.  The creator of this article was either unaware or was indifferent to the fact that a List of towns in New York already exists, and that information as to which of them is the largest can be had by changing the dropdown setting under "population".  Consensus seems to be that the latter article should be merged into List of municipalities in New York .  Whether or not one agrees with that finding, there is still no need for a separate "largest" article, because that town information will be available in whichever article it's eventually housed in.  If the model of List of municipalities in Pennsylvania is used, the Long Island towns will appear before the aforementioned cities anyway.  Stony Brook babble 02:12, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Obvious WP:POVFORK of List of municipalities in New York .  Also, there seems to be towns in the list as well, so this list is unnecessary.  Flutter Dash 344 ( talk ) 04:53, 28 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
Clorène Rateau : All I found in my searches were passing mentions ( 2012 , 2014 , 2015 , 2018 , etc.) JTtheOG ( talk ) 05:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Haiti .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 05:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 13:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 13:16, 28 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
Awantika College : A previous PROD was contested.  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 09:10, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , India ,  and Madhya Pradesh .  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 09:10, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - No references to look at and I can't find anything significant from a quick search.  - Imcdc Contact 01:39, 1 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  Necrothesp ( talk ) 12:23, 4 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Clearly fails WP:ORG .  LibStar ( talk ) 12:41, 4 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
Kei Hirata : This source is not enough for WP:SPORTBASIC or WP:GNG on its own.  The only other source on the footballer of this name seems to be Emine Cross , which is not independent as it appears to be his employer.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:29, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Japan .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:30, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:40, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 13:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , not significant enough.  Fulmard ( talk ) 03:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – per above.  Idiosincrático ( talk ) 17:35, 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