hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Strideapp: Was PROD'ed before with the reason: No indication that this application satisfies the applicable notability guidelines.  Somewhat promotional in tone, but not blatant enough for speedy deletion.  PROD was removed without providing any reason why this article should stay.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 11:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 11:34, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 12:01, 21 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, ✗ plicit 12:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : ZDNet and GeedWire are both RS.  Not super extensive, but enough to keep.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:19, 28 December 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!  07:29, 4 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The product in question isn't even named this anymore, and so all the listed sources are extremely out of date.  Steven Walling • talk 04:34, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  08:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete .  The ZDNet and GeekWire sources are both routine coverage of an acquisition which rely heavily on quotes from one of the founders of Stride; the Techcrunch article is better but WP:TECHCRUNCH cautions that they have a habit of relying on press releases and other PR material and might not demonstrate notability.  I found more GeekWire coverage which is again an interview with a Stride representative and doesn't count towards notability.  The fact that the sources are old or that the app has changed its name is not a reason for deletion, but on looking through them I can't see any evidence for notability.  Caeciliusinhorto-public ( talk ) 09:03, 12 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
Hamid Reza Seyedi: The basic problem is a lack of WP:SIGCOV in any sources.  Quick review of existing sources: 1, 3/8, and 4 are WP:ROUTINE / WP:TRIVIAL coverage, not significant mentions.  Source 2 has no reference to the subject.  5, 9 and 10 are primary source bios.  6 and 7 are trivial mentions in lists of speakers.  11-15 are references to the subject's own writing and thus ineligible for notability.  A WP:BEFORE search turns up no additional sources to point to notability.  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 00:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Aviation , Transportation ,  and Iran .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:13, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 00:50, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per nom which can simply be out as PROMO and doesn't meet WP:NPOL .  Safari Scribe Edits!  Talk!  10:20, 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
Chicago Center for Urban Life and Culture: Article doesn't appear to ever have been referenced, and I can't find any in-depth, secondary coverage in reliable sources, or verification of the awards claimed, just passing mentions, and entries on university websites and non-profit listings.  Article created by a single-purpose account with an apparent conflict of interest.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 10:32, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Illinois .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 10:32, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This is all I see [20] , a brief mention.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 17:25, 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: delete
Harkuşta: Could be merged, but there isn't much to add to the other page, and the sources here aren't the best.  Aintabli ( talk ) 01:27, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Armenia and Turkey .  Aintabli ( talk ) 01:27, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete As per user Aintabli.  killer bee 05:49, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Dance-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:24, 11 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
Supremacy 1914: Citation 1 and 3 seem to be linked to the subject.  Citation 2 won't open.  They use a lot of puffery and seem to let you play the game.  Citation 4 also seems to be selling the game to some extent.  Citation 5 does not look reliable and looking up Game Genetics leads to nothing.  Citation 6 seems to be the most independent but look suspiciously similar to 4.  Citation 7 is dead.  Citation 8 is a forum.  Citation 9 is independent though I have doubts on how reliable it is.  Citations 10 and 11 look to either be online arcades or mods for the game.  Citation 12 is the website.
 Being most optimistic, it barely passes wp:N ✶Mitch 199811 ✶ 23:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  ✶Mitch 199811 ✶ 23:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete . ' I think it's been relaunched on mobile, there are some sources for that, but nothing in RS we'd use for gaming articles.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and salt Game fails the Metacritic test and is just as non-notable now as it was in the first AfD, with a total lack of reliable sources.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 03:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Fails WP:GNG due to lack of coverage in reliable, secondary sources.  Woodroar ( talk ) 12:53, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete . .  The lack of citations and the big size is alarming... -- TheLonelyPather ( talk ) 14:09, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete . per nom  -- Devoke water 21:05, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom fails WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 07:11, 23 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
Eliana Gropman: Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Sports .  Bgsu98 (Talk) 22:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Maryland , Michigan ,  and Washington, D.C. .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:41, 22 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : fails NSKATE, can't find SIGCOV.  Please ping if sources identified.  Queen of Hearts 23:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Has not achieved the requisite success or notability to merit an article.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 01:25, 26 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
Zobel Roxas Street: The third source is from a real estate company , but the current "About us" page does not state the origins of the road (failed verification).  The fourth citation is a vintage US-published map, and it is uncertain if it can be used as a reliable source for the history of the road.  A brief search on news content on Google does not give fruitful results.  The only reliable source is an old news about a fire that hit a commercial building along the street ; the rest of the news search results are mostly hotel sites, travel sites, social media advertisements of establishments found along the road, and other obviously unreliable and unencyclopedic sources.  All in all, "Zobel Roxas Street" is not notable per GEOROAD.  JWilz12345 ( Talk | Contrib's. ) 02:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography , Transportation ,  and Philippines .  JWilz12345 ( Talk | Contrib's. ) 02:35, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom -- Lenticel ( talk ) 08:24, 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
Mark Vella Tomlin: The strongest attempt at a notability claim is that he had a role as a stunt flyer in a film, but that's sourced only to IMDb rather than any WP:GNG -worthy media coverage about that work -- and otherwise, the sourcing consists of a short blurb in which he's named only as the winner of a hamper in a contest, and a piece which is just an op-ed replying to points in his own earlier op-ed, neither of which are GNG builders.  Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have a stronger notability claim, supported by much, much better sourcing, than this.  Bearcat ( talk ) 21:54, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation and Malta .  Bearcat ( talk ) 21:54, 10 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:19, 10 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
Randy Powell (author): No good WP:ATD .  This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it.  Boleyn ( talk ) 13:54, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep while there are no sources on the author, several of his books might be notable.  There are a bunch of reviews on Publisher's Weekly and Kirkus Reviews .  One of them, The Whistling Toilets , won a prize from the American Library Association .  As it's written, the page does not show the notability of the author, but it can be expanded to include information on his books.  -- Broc ( talk ) 14:08, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Washington .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 14:09, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Winning the Library Association prize denotes notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:55, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete He did not win "the Library Association prize", one book's recording was named to its "Selected Audiobooks for Young Adults", which appears to have 30 titles per year and is not enough for WP:NAUTHOR .  There needs to be significant coverage or sources on the individual for an article.  Reywas92 Talk 19:50, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete have amended my ! vote above, after the prior comment explained the nomination.  I don't really see much coverage for this person.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:37, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I’ve been trying to figure out why exactly I got a notice for this AFD, and it turns out I created the article, which makes sense - except I have no idea what I was thinking when I put this out there (probably read something by the author while still in collage).  Changing times and standards I guess.  At any rate, if ya’ll wanna delete it go ahead.  2600:1011:B13D:12B7:DC8:577A:7FF5:4615 ( talk ) 04:45, 29 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
Jennie Tisdell: I am unable to find anything more than passing mentions of the subject.  Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTBASIC .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:29, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Liberia-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 13:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Per nom.  Svartner ( talk ) 06:42, 31 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
David McGuinness: ser!  ( chat to me - see my edits ) 15:28, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Ireland .  ser!  ( chat to me - see my edits ) 15:28, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : A person with a similar name appears to have been murdered, coverage is all about that individual.  Nothing for this person, does not appear to meet notability for politicians.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 16:30, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Only notable for holding a position on the local level.  Fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL .  FatCat96 ( talk ) 16:35, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - non notable former local politician, fails WP:NPOL , Spleodrach ( talk ) 17:34, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Fails WP:SIGCOV and WP:NPOL .  Frankly kinda surprised that this article was accepted/promoted through AfC process in the first place.  The COI/SPA/PROMO overtones, associated with the article's creation, do very little to help.  Guliolopez ( talk ) 19:05, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per all above.  Best, GPL93 ( talk ) 21:49, 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
Kristian Benkő: Little is known about his career after 2015, when the HLSZ profile ends.  He did score many goals on one of Sweden's lower tiers , which is hardly significant, neither is his signing for a team on the 7th tier .  Geschichte ( talk ) 09:22, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Sweden .  Shellwood ( talk ) 10:55, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails in WP:GNG .  Svartner ( talk ) 14:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 15:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 15:30, 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
Hacktivist Vanguard: A WP:BEFORE search turned up the same self-promotion of the three sources currently cited, mostly reposts of a "Force for Cybersecurity" manifesto, which in the initial creation had a dozen copies cited on various blogs masquerading as newspapers.  It's a recently created group, and may have only one member, as "Hacktivist Vanguard" is credited only as the cinematographer of several films on its IMDb entry.  The article is a near copy of Draft:Hacktivist Vanguard , created by two other SPAs.  An IP editor tried to credit the group as "hacker group" in the cast sections of the two film articles linked in the See also section, but I can find no evidence of any film roles for this "group" online.  It all reads like a recruitment page for a new hacktivist group.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 07:21, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Computing , Internet ,  and India .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 07:21, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - current sources are blog/PR.  Was not able to find anything reliable; everything just seems to be user-created promotional materia.  Sam Kuru (talk) 15:27, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy delete per WP:G11 .  -- Maddy from Celeste ( WAVEDASH ) 22:10, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete there is no WP:RS coverage.  Sohom ( talk ) 09:24, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy delete per G11 and no RSes or notability Softlem ( talk ) 13:51, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete all 3 of the sources on the page came up empty-handed on a reliable sources search.  Chumpih t 19:44, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete MP1999 ❯❯❯ Talk 08:07, 27 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
Frédérique Feder: Poor resources.  BostonMensa ( talk ) 11:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions .  BostonMensa ( talk ) 11:44, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  North America 1000 12:33, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 13:15, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:25, 12 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:V - not a single reliable source .  Never mind WP:BLP and WP:NACTOR .  Bearian ( talk ) 19:18, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:53, 19 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
Calibretto 13: The only point in their favour (as far as I can tell, anyway) is that they released albums on Tooth & Nail Records , a significant indie label, but I'm not sure that's enough.  Suntooooth , it/he ( talk / contribs ) 06:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Indiana .  Suntooooth , it/he ( talk / contribs ) 06:43, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment that I forgot to include in my original message: if the consensus is that they shouldn't have their own article, it might be best to redirect to Harley Poe ?  Not sure though.  Suntooooth , it/he ( talk / contribs ) 06:45, 17 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!  06:39, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I see know cause for deletion of the article.  A number of bands, roughly the same size from Tooth and Nail Records have their own Wikipedia pages.  While there are not a lot of sources available, I think the deletion of the page would be a further loss of information.  Theo1858 ( talk ) 16:49, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm still not convinced that they're notable enough considering the lack of coverage - Discogs doesn't convey notability in the slightest (and is generally considered an unreliable source due to being user-generated), Concert Archives is at least partially user-generated and doesn't require artists listed to be notable, and the Harley Poe review is only a passing mention.  There is the one Punk News review of Dead By Dawn, but I don't think that's enough to convince me.  We'll see what others say, I guess.  Suntooooth , it/he ( talk / contribs ) 11:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] At this point I would say Calibretto meets Notability section 1 criterion, with multiple published album reviews in newspapers, print magazines, and punk zines.  They also meet criterion section 5, with two full length albums and 1 EP released on Tooth and Nail Records (A notable independent label with a history of more than a few years, and with a roster of performers, many of whom are independently notable, and a significant impact within a specific music genre (alternative Christian punk and hardcore scene) The band's music was also featured in multiple published works including the Stephen Baldwin produced documentary "Livin It" and the WB tv show "What's New, Scooby Doo?".  Theo1858 ( talk ) 16:42, 30 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Wordsmith Talk to me 18:05, 31 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