hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Paul Lindquist: Mayor of a smaller city.  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 15:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Sweden .  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 15:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Likely keep: I'd like additional clarity on this bit of GNG, but I think we have a procedural keep: "Politicians ... who have held ... state/province–wide office, or have been members of legislative bodies at those levels".  The Stockholm Regional Council is a regional-scale body that appears to fill the role that the province does here in Canada.  For instance, the region handles health care, which is a provincial responsibility here.  I can't claim to fully understand the unitary state system in Sweden, but it appears these regions are effectively a way to have provincial-style governance within the unitary state.  If my understanding is correct, I believe this meets GNG as a member of that legislative body.  Maury Markowitz ( talk ) 18:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] As Sweden is not a federal state, Swedish county legislators are not presumed notable via WP:NPOL in the same way an American or Indian state legislator would.  There is just a fundamental difference in authority and powers.  As usual, just because he does not pass NPOL does not preclude him from passing via standard GNG.  Curbon7 ( talk ) 17:52, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] But why ?  Am I correct in thinking these bodies serve the same basic purpose in terms of service delivery as a provincial/state group in a federalist system?  Or is it fundamentally different?  Maury Markowitz ( talk ) 13:42, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Maury Markowitz , To quote WP:NSUBPOL , which for full transparency is an explanatory essay, This [referring to subnational legislatures in federal nations] is in contrast to bodies, such as municipal councils, whose power is limited to administrative, supervisory or regulatory functions.  Generally speaking, federal political systems devolve legislative powers to lower, subnational levels (such as a state or province), whereas unitary political systems do not, with legislative power concentrated at the national level .  Curbon7 ( talk ) 19:34, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Fair enough, TIL...  Maury Markowitz ( talk ) 21:41, 24 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  According to the article he has never held any political office that would be considered "inherently" notable under WP:NPOL at all — at the local level, the bar for inclusion hinges on his sourceability, but this is completely unreferenced.  Bearcat ( talk ) 21:07, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:37, 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: delete
Somarelang Tikologo: Created by a single purpose editor .  14 of the 15 sources are its own website.  LibStar ( talk ) 00:41, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:GNG as all sources are connected to the subject, also fails WP:PROMO .  Couldn't find any suitable sources online.  JML1148 ( Talk | Contribs ) 07:54, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Environment-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:56, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:56, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:56, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Botswana-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 14:50, 25 May 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
2023 Liga 3 Riau: Refs in article and BEFORE showed nothing other than promo, stats and game recaps.  Nothing meets independent reliable sources with significant coverage addressing the subject directly and indepth .  // Timothy :: talk 10:37, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Indonesia .  Shellwood ( talk ) 11:39, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:32, 30 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 10:36, 30 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – not notable.  Kante4 ( talk ) 13:05, 1 October 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
The Lover (2016 film): Source are primary and none of the awards are from major festivals.  S0091 ( talk ) 20:00, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  S0091 ( talk ) 20:00, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Fails WP:MOVIE ; no evidence of notability present.  Sgubaldo ( talk ) 21:53, 13 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no reviews, no major awards.   Not enough coverage to justify an article on this film.  Eluchil404 ( talk ) 04:38, 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: delete
R17 Ventures AG: Is WP:ADMASQ .  Contested CSD hence AfD.  Many primary sources and churnalism sources.  Likely UPE.  🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:18, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Advertising , Companies ,  and Switzerland .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:48, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Declined at AfC and then moved to mainspace on a new account's 11th edit.  Nothing in the article is indicative of this being more than a marketing agency going about its business in its chosen market.  The given references (locations, investments, inclusion in a "Clutch 100" fastest-growing list, intern scheme announcement, etc.) fall under trivial coverage at WP:CORPDEPTH .  Searches find another recent industry award ( "best performance marketing agency in South Africa" at a Markets African Excellence Awards) but nothing indicative of attained notability here.  AllyD ( talk ) 07:24, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - The article does not speak for itself and explain how the company passes corporate notability , which is based on what third parties say about the company.   This article is about what the company says about itself, which is common, but does not pass corporate notability .   If the proponents will identify three sources, an analysis of those sources can be performed.   The conduct of the proponents is typical either of ultras , fanatical editors, or of paid editors ; but corporations don't have ultras , so draw your conclusion.   The edit summary Perfectly Written and informative.  is a red flag in itself.  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 16:57, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment to User:Timtrent - Be careful what you wish for.   Don't nominate anything with 23 references for G7 .   It might be deleted.   It will then spend seven days at Deletion Review , and then be Relisted by DRV , and then spend seven days at AFD anyway that you had tried to avoid.   This time, you didn't get your wish, and that means only seven days rather than fourteen.  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 16:57, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Robert McClenon I have more bizarre wishes than you could possibly know!  🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:11, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete same reasons as the two delete votes above mine.  Fred Zepelin ( talk ) 00:34, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Agree with preceding contributors.  There's not enough independent reliably sourced material to pass WP:ORGIND .  Rupples ( talk ) 22:04, 24 October 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
Costantino Mario Ruspoli, 4th Prince of Poggio Suasa: No sources in article except a geneology page, BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth .  BLPs require strong sourcing.  // Timothy :: talk 04:42, 4 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility , Italy ,  and Brazil .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 07:34, 4 February 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!  09:36, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , could not find any coverage in reliable sources.  Shaws username ( talk ) 14:40, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , this seems to be a non-notable member of the family.  Being born into a formerly princely family is no guarantee of notability, as it is not inherited.  Chiswick Chap ( talk ) 15:19, 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
Belle Rock Entertainment: Zero secondary sources.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 15:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Europe .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 15:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note : The article was titled Carmen Media at the time of the first AfD, so the earlier nomination was at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carmen Media .  (No opinion at this time.)  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:20, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:21, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] DELETE - Article has no proper references.  Google yielded no additional news.  Z3r0h3r000 ( talk ) 07:53, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Nominated previously at AFD so not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  21:40, 18 March 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!  19:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I'm unable to locate any references that meet GNG/ WP:NCORP criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing ++ 14:20, 27 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
Dinosaur Training: Hatman31 ( talk ) 23:27, 19 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bodybuilding-related deletion discussions .  Hatman31 ( talk ) 23:27, 19 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete -- it's a training regimen promoted by Brooks Kubik.  All sources I can find are written by him.  I do not see any third party coverage or non-promotional coverage.  Fails GNG.  ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 16:33, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: the first AFD was no consensus that was from 2006 and the keep rationale would not stand up today... "I have heard of this" and "this is a notable training program" are not valid, at least not anymore.  ‡ El cid, el campeador talk 16:36, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom and El cid.  Promotional essay which should've been deleted back in 2006.  Fails GNG, since no coverage from independent reliable sources can be found.  CycloneYoris talk!  23:58, 26 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
Gul Wareen: Moved to mainspace immediate after being declined and pushed back for further work.  Since there is the potential for notability to be proven I suggest the outcome be to draftify .  I have also nominated the picture currently featured since the licence is in doubt.  Fails WP:NMUSICIAN as presented here.  🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 12:39, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : When I encountered this BLP, rather than immediately nom it for deletion, I  decided to give it a chance by draftifying it .  However, the BLPs creator Pashtonyar moved it back to the main NS after the review was declined .  The subject does not satisfy the GNG as well NSINGER, and the BLP currently relies heavily on trivial mentions and ROTM coverage.   — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 13:42, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Bands and musicians ,  and Pakistan .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 14:35, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per Saqib .  Coco bb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs ) 23:47, 31 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
Wuhan Derbies: The teams literally played each other only 2 times and the sources are just routine match reports and nothing more, there is nothing in this article that would indicate why is this a rivalry and why is it notable, its just a random list of two local clubs playing against each other, not every "rivalry" needs a Wikipedia article.  Snowflake91 ( talk ) 22:38, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , Football ,  and China .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:41, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:GNG .  Notability is debated and no WP:RS to be seen yet.  The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 13:23, 5 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  A search online does find several articles, but as nominator says they seem to be routine match reports, at least as I've read them through Google Translate.  StereoFolic ( talk ) 13:39, 5 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
Glen Huntly Road: LibStar ( talk ) 03:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete —not covered under WP:GEOROAD as a local street, fails WP:GNG .  Imzadi 1979 → 16:30, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and Australia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:35, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , fails WP:GEOROAD and WP:GNG .  If this survives then I'll have to propose my local streets for creation.  TarnishedPath talk 06:22, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Fails WP:GNG and WP:GEOROAD .  -- Kinu t / c 21:11, 4 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
Cynthia Chéry: I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:27, 17 October 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 ) 20:27, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:03, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:52, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - found a passing mention in ANMWE but nothing more than that Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:30, 21 October 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 Zubeen Garg live performances: The factors that led to the deletion do not appear to have changed as there's no indication the performances were notable.  While I would not be opposed to a redirect (protected, to stop re-creation) I am opposed to a merge as this information isn't encyclopedic in addition to not being notable.  Star Mississippi 17:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Events ,  and India .  Star Mississippi 17:43, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:39, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I understand your concern.  Give me some time to reconstruct the article with better citations and removing social media links.  Any suggestions would be appreciated.  Thank you.  Discographymen ( talk ) 20:11, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I would not even consider merge to Zubeen_Garg#Discography because of how poorly sourced the page is for all performances.  Most of the sources are Twitter and blogs from a quick Overlook.  Page fails WP:GNG .  RangersRus ( talk ) 16:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete His live performances are not so many, nor so notable as of yet that it will require a separate article.  ❯❯❯ Pra vega g=9.8 20:30, 18 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
Philipp Haas: There seem to be 2 interviews with him.  He hasn't won any awards.  He is just the CEO of a notable company.  There is not much for a proper biography article.  Ynsfial ( talk ) 07:55, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Switzerland , Turkey ,  and New Zealand .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 08:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per nom.  Hyperbolick ( talk ) 09:12, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , per nom and no sigcov.  Alexeyevitch ( talk ) 08:47, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : doesn't meet Wikipedia Notability guidelines for people.  EncyclopediaEditorXIV ( talk ) 17:54, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per above editor comments and nomination.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 21:10, 16 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
Battle of Erzurum (1918): This article is built on a false premise; there was no battle of capture.  I attempted to WP:VERIFY by looking for other sources, but none spoke of a battle.  I attempted to WP:VERIFY by looking for other sources, but none spoke of a battle.  The Kazemzadeh source does not even contain the quote that is attributed to it.  - K evo 3 2 7 ( talk ) 07:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , Military , Armenia ,  and Turkey .  Shellwood ( talk ) 10:19, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - per above.  Lack of WP:RS regarding this "battle".  Archives908 ( talk ) 12:51, 26 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per norm.  -- HistoryofIran ( talk ) 14:04, 31 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
LG Tromm: It's written like an advertisement.  There are very few sources online that references the Tromm brand.  𝕒𝕥𝕠𝕞𝕚𝕔𝕕𝕣𝕒𝕘𝕠𝕟𝟙𝟛𝟞 🗨️ 🖊️ 04:38, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:22, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 11:33, 8 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!  07:04, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - incredibly specific, promotional, and does not appear to meet WP:GNG .  While there are news articles referenced, they appear to be about the fact that LG and Samsung entered the same market at the same time, rather than being directly about this line of washers/dryers.  Tollens ( talk ) 07:42, 15 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