hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Workers' Association of Malmfälten: Presumably for lack of notability (local political organisation which once won one seat) and lack of sources (tagged as unsourced since 2009), but it would be best if they explained their reasoning here.  (note: the addition of deletion sorting categories like "Sweden" or "Politics" doesn't seem to work in Twinkle at the moment, hence no delsort added).  Fram ( talk ) 07:35, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sweden and Politics .  Ingratis ( talk ) 07:58, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 08:00, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , it lacks sources, structure, notebility and content.  A simple look at it would make you understand why it should be deleted.  Dencoolast33 ( talk ) 10:23, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I see no reason to cover political entities in a single Swedish muncipality with very limited success.  I could say merge to United Socialists , but that too rather looks like a candidate for deletion.  Geschichte ( talk ) 20:17, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , there's very limited coverage in Swedish media archives.  AlexandraAVX ( talk ) 17:33, 17 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , no sources given and very little coverage.  — Alien333 ( what I did & why I did it wrong ) 17:38, 19 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
Birra Peja: Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:19, 31 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!  04:59, 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!  05:43, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – I doubt its notability.  Nothing in Google News and sources seem to be WP:SELFPUB .  This also needs WP:TNT as it seems to be a mix of a geographic article and a beer company article… TLA (talk) 07:07, 14 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
Football broadcast in India: The most fancrufty list to appeal to the most ardent fans.  The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN .  Also, sources are announcements and does not help to assert notability.  Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 10:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Football , Lists ,  and India .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 10:05, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:29, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 12:54, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ GiantSnowman : There are some sources at the article AusLondonder ( talk ) 16:07, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Nothing significant that I can see...  Giant Snowman 16:29, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Of course, there are sources.  What do they do other than indicate those are evidences they are providing coverages to sports leagues?  Are they helping with the subject's notability?  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 16:30, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Per nom.  Wikipedia is not a TV guide for viewers.  Fails WP:GNG .  RangersRus ( talk ) 13:15, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  I found [11] .  Esolo5002 ( talk ) 18:46, 28 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
Wiehan Hay: All I found was this transactional announcement.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 23:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union , South Africa ,  and France .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 23:26, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Looks to fail WP:GNG .  No suitable redirect per WP:ATD .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 09:15, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per all above.  Insufficient independent WP:SIGCOV to satisfy GNG.  Bgv.  ( talk ) 04:25, 19 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify : This article should be moved to the draft space as it does not currently meet WP:GNG .  It needs more coverage from independent, reliable sources to qualify for a standalone article.  AstridMitch ( talk ) 5:36, 19 June 2024 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
Craig Conway (actor): Not seeing in-depth coverage specifically about him and his career.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 14:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Actors and filmmakers ,  and United Kingdom .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 14:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete since subject does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ARTIST .  This kind of Wikipedia criterion, we emphasize once more, does not reflect in the slightest the person's professional abilities or anything else related to the subject's life.  But Wikipedia is not some complete directory of actors .  - The Gnome ( talk ) 20:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:46, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : It seems that two of four sources are actually about notable actress Jill Halfpenny in which the subject of this article gets a brief mention as her ex-husband which is grasping at a straw of inhereted notability .  Another is only about him doing the Great North Run, which good for him but that is what we'd call routine coverage and not worth an article.  The last is a single mention of him playing one role, which is not significant coverage at all.  -- D'n'B - t -- 07:11, 28 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
FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship qualification: Qualifications for FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship .  No sources, BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV from IS RS addressing the subject directly and in-depth.  nn unnecessary CFORK that fragments content.  No objection to a consensus redirect.  Nothing in article is sourced for a merge.  // Timothy :: talk 08:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:40, 1 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] keep or draftify until sources are added (they do exist).  WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP Certainly notable as the qualification articles for each tournament.  With sources, article itself would need more prose.  Pelmeen10 ( talk ) 08:52, 5 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  09:24, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] comment - Move to " List of FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship qualifications "?  Pelmeen10 ( talk ) 15:07, 8 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 17:59, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : No sources have been provided above, just OTHERSTUFF comment.  // Timothy :: talk 03:19, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - this is essentially the parent article of ones like 2022 FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship qualification and 2018 FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship qualification etc. so if this one goes then we need to start considering deleting the articles for its offspring.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:15, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Based on those pages, but a parent?  I made the move to "List of...".  Pelmeen10 ( talk ) 12:17, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: 3rd/final relist.  So far there is an assertion of sourcing without a demonstration of them in the article or this discussion, and low participation.  Note that the article was renamed/moved on 4/22 to List of FIVB Volleyball Men's World Championship qualifications .  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 03:34, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Unsourced article (and WP:ROUTINE coverage of individual matches would not be sufficient to meet NLIST for this topic).  MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:06, 3 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
UCL University Preparatory Certificate: Also sourced entirely to primary sources so even if notable probably would be best to WP:TNT Lavalizard101 ( talk ) 15:48, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and United Kingdom .  Lavalizard101 ( talk ) 15:48, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This article has existed since 2011, but at no time has it had refs other than UCL.  If there are references that can support notability, best path might be to copy the content to offline, let it be deleted, and then start fresh, restoring only that content that can be supported by independent, reliable source references (see WP:42 ).  David notMD ( talk ) 16:26, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment there may be some mileage for an article on the general concept of these preparatory courses, as UCL are not the only people in the business.  We already have INTO University Partnerships , which is about a commercial organisation that partners with universities to provide what I think is a similar service.  Elemimele ( talk ) 16:43, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The general article for these is Foundation Programme .  This is currently a rather short article but could be expanded.  Robminchin ( talk ) 20:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That article is currently talking about a totally different course.  It's a highly problematic title as there are Foundation Programmes for almost everything, at every level.  You're right it could be generalised, but it runs the risk of becoming too general or turning into a dictionary definition.  Elemimele ( talk ) 11:42, 31 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete (COI as alumni); fails WP:GNG .  ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk ) 20:59, 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
CSWF Hardcore Championship: Not enought coverage to prove notability.  HHH Pedrigree ( talk ) 10:08, 9 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Wrestling and New Jersey .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 11:51, 9 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per nominator.  DarkHorseMayhem ( talk ) 23:26, 10 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:10, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Non-notable pro wrestling championship.  -- Mann Mann ( talk ) 04:21, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails GNG.  LM2000 ( talk ) 12:02, 22 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
Andromeda Software Development: Surprisingly, there isn't significant coverage of the group in Freax: The Brief History of the Demoscene, Volume 1 (2005) by Tamás Polgár [ hu ] ; "Andromeda" is mentioned 25 times, but in reference to the Norwegian demo group, not the Greek group that is the subject of the article.  toweli ( talk ) 13:19, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music , Video games , Visual arts , Organizations , Computing ,  and Greece .  toweli ( talk ) 13:19, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No trace of the demogroup in any remotely significant sources and I could not find any suitable sources that would be beneficial to the article.  This should have been gone years ago.  MimirIsSmart ( talk ) 09:21, 28 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
Leïla Maatouk: The subject, an Algerian women's footballer, seemingly played one game for her national team.  She is mentioned in squad lists and not much else.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 08:48, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Algeria .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 08:48, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: There seem to be a lot of cases like this where people are likely accidently using Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Notability of footballers#International footballers without realizing that WP:GNG is requisite.  Dazzling4 ( talk ) 15:56, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:09, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 12:50, 19 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
Precious Baison: I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 06:17, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Zimbabwe .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 06:17, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  A total of 9 hits on ProQuest, 2 of which are tagged as duplicates, all of which are simply mentions in lists of squad members.  NB, there is a doctoral student and tutor at the University of Pretoria with the same name (Precious (Zhou) Baison), who has published a few articles and papers, but currently also doesn't meet the Wikipedia threshold for notability.  Cielquiparle ( talk ) 10:23, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 14:18, 25 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
Classic Soul Ballads: Fails WP:NALBUM .  UtherSRG (talk) 13:08, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions .  UtherSRG (talk) 13:08, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom: I found this writeup (which has no byline and looks very much like an advertisement rather than editorial) and nothing else.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 16:53, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete What kind of coverage do these releases get beyond their own infomercials?  Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 21:33, 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
Bright Star, Alabama: The one good hit I got was a set of state statistical reports from the early 1900s which list it as a "post office".  And that's all I can verify: on the maps it's a definite "there's no there there" crossroads.  Mangoe ( talk ) 03:44, 6 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Alabama .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:27, 6 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] There is an enormous number of Lulu.com books to skip past in the search engines, someone having gone on a wild spree of (barely coherent) self-publishing; but if it helps, having got past that I discovered that this was election precinct #38 in Blount County, Alabama .  Uncle G ( talk ) 10:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  As there is no SIGCOV, this topic does not pass GNG and so cannot be written about on Wikipedia as a standalone article.  Also recommend Merge to Blount County, Alabama for this and other minor settlements in general.  बिनोद थारू ( talk ) 03:48, 9 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!  03:41, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Non-notable location.   I don't see a point in merging when this is such an unlikely search term.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 15:51, 13 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
Lock Yue Chew: An associate professor, h-index 21 ( Google Scholar ).  For CV, see the homepage at https://sites.google.com/view/lockyuechew/biography Jähmefyysikko ( talk ) 07:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Science ,  and Singapore .  Jähmefyysikko ( talk ) 07:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I tagged this for notability two years ago after not finding evidence of passing WP:PROF .  I think he still does not pass.  The citation counts are not high enough (for physics) to convince me of #C1, the awards listed are all too minor to pass #C2, and there seems to be nothing else.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 17:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Does not appear to have any particular achievements, awards, positions, publications, etc., that set him apart from an average professor in his field.  nf utvol ( talk ) 19:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  As others have said, no evidence of notability.  Ldm1954 ( talk ) 04:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as WP:Too soon .  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 22:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Delete per nom  -- Devokewater | (tαlk) 21:28, 6 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
Intetics: Notability challenged since 2012.  * Pppery * it has begun... 17:14, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Software ,  and Florida .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 17:16, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Belarus-related deletion discussions .  AllyD ( talk ) 17:41, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : An article on a company, with the lead paragraph a close paraphrase of this item by the CEO.  There was a COI warning to the original editor in 2018; subsequently the article was been heavily edited by a succession of IP and subsequently-blocked sock accounts.  At present, the article is a timeline of relocations, certifications, industry awards, and product propositions; earlier article versions were more succinct, but still didn't demonstrate attained notability ; nor are searches finding better sources .  AllyD ( talk ) 15:06, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Seems to be a promo case.  Almost orphaned.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 15:07, 27 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
Nimrod (Doctor Who): The article itself doesn't even cite any.  Doesn't meet GNG or SIGCOV.  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 00:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Science fiction and fantasy ,  and Television .  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 00:24, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Not enough reliable third-party sources to pass the WP:GNG .  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 23:35, 2 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete generically named character who appeared twice.  Extremely unlikely search target.  Dronebogus ( talk ) 01:42, 3 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