hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Deborah Bako Odoh: BEFORE doesn't help either (only this can not establish GNG).  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 08:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Women ,  and Nigeria .  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 08:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:52, 27 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per nom.  Being a permanent secretary for a President doesn't give you much role except from the internal circle.  More or less appeared on media but not SNG.  Delete is just the option till then, when it may meet WP:N.  All the Best!  Otuọcha ( talk ) 16:19, 30 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Firstly, the article would make you think she is the permanent secretary of Nigeria but she's not.  She's just one of the many permanent secretaries to the Head of Office of a Nigerian institution.  Secondly, the sources available and its counterparts that could be seen in a WP: BEFORE are press releases of the redeployment and posting these perm secs and not even particularly about her.  Hence, there are no in-depth, independent coverage from reliable sources to establish notability here.  Reading Beans 05:48, 2 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
List of Albanians killed during the Russian invasion of Ukraine: Two item list, topic has not been discussed as a group by reliable sources.  Neither of the two items is notable, article serves no purpose per CLN.  // Timothy :: talk 14:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The content should be moved to Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian War if notable, the article could be made a redirect to there if not notable.  ManyAreasExpert ( talk ) 14:45, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military , Albania ,  and Ukraine .  Shellwood ( talk ) 15:54, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:09, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep For two main reasons:  1. The topic of the article is relevant to the Russian Invasion of Ukraine  2. The list can grow in the future Salfanto ( talk ) 12:25, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Irrelevant Hopeful not // Timothy :: talk 18:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Well yes hopefully not because these are people's lives Salfanto ( talk ) 12:27, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I know we both agree on that.  Greetings from Los Angeles, // Timothy :: talk 13:12, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:LISTN , WP:INDISCRIMINATE , and as a WP:CFORK of List of deaths during the Russian invasion of Ukraine .  ! Voters are reminded to vote via policy- or source-based rationale rather than WP:ITSUSEFUL or WP:ILIKEIT or WP:CRYSTALBALL .  Conyo14 ( talk ) 16:29, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete after moving the notable information to other articles.  Unfortunately, WP:NOTMEMORIAL .  Any notable information with reliable news coverage should be added to Casualties of the Russo-Ukrainian War §§ Foreign fighters and volunteers ​ and Foreign civilians (based on the info in this article, those sections need to be updated, anyway) or any article on Albanian responses to the war.  – Primium ( talk ) 04:39, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:LISTN .  LibStar ( talk ) 09:39, 18 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
Timothy Ong: Unable to verify awards.  scope_creep Talk 07:30, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Clearly, a simple google search of this individual would show this person's notability and coverage.  In addition to that of all the information stated within the article are sourced, as no personal research or information were even written into the article.  In context to the awards, they have been sourced by several websites and books of publishers from varying organisations, educational institutions and books.  He might not be a significantly importantly person internationally, but his influence in a regional level (Brunei and ASEAN) has been shown repeatedly with his meetings with notable people and organisations.  Pangalau ( talk ) 12:01, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hi @ Pangalau : Could you please post the best three references per WP:THREE which by consensus is best practice, so I can examine them to see if he is notable.  Thanks.  scope_creep Talk 12:42, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] [39] [40] [41] Pangalau ( talk ) 13:03, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Other folk will have a look at the article and references you post here to support its notability, as well.  Hope that helps.  scope_creep Talk 12:55, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yeap, this is very much appreciated, thanks Pangalau ( talk ) 13:03, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The first article listed in the three above is tangentially about this individual, talking about a power struggle.  The other two are speaker bios, so non-useful.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:22, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Not enough coverage to warrant an article.  The awards given seem notable, but I can't find sourcing to use.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Economics , Brunei , England ,  and Australia .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:34, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:35, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , seems like there are primary sources to establish that he's a mover and a shaker, however where are the secondary sources?  Nil, nada, zilch.  That's at least what my searches told me, please correct me if I'm wrong.  TarnishedPath talk 11:51, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Possibly the best solution here is to move some of the useful informations (power struggle) to the established pages of Sultan Hassanal Bolkiah and Prince Mohamed Bolkiah .  Thoughts?  Pangalau ( talk ) 14:06, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You'd still need sufficient secondary sources to justify the material being in those other articles in the first place.  TarnishedPath talk 09:39, 26 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
Pyotr Kosarevsky: Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 21:31, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football and Russia .  Owen× ☎ 21:35, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:06, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 17:54, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:00, 15 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete -- I am unable to find enough coverage to meet WP:GNG or WP:SPORTCRIT . JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:24, 16 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete -- Nowhere going near WP:GNG MaskedSinger ( talk ) 05:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - minor league, zero goals, poor sourcing.  Bearian ( talk ) 23:52, 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
Lexical balancing: Jimfbleak - talk to me?  09:15, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Language-related deletion discussions .  Wikishovel ( talk ) 11:07, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per nom Dazzling4 ( talk ) 16:51, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I don’t see any sources to support this and wonder if it is based on a misunderstanding.  Mccapra ( talk ) 19:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete lack of significant coverage found ( t · c ) buidhe 09:26, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Given the edit history of the editor who created the article, this is most likely a hoax.  -- McSly ( talk ) 02:11, 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
Kentoverse: See deletion discussions: for artist , and album Loved One .  Imaginatorium ( talk ) 06:08, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Japan .  Imaginatorium ( talk ) 06:08, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] For the first award listed as "won" that I checked, the linked cite actually lists it as an "honorable mention" ( [30] ).  Dekimasu よ!  06:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I see they give out dozens of awards and the awards happen every month.  On top of that, the one cited is from 2017, before this album.  Adumbrativus ( talk ) 10:12, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 07:11, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete for the same reasons as the other AFDs mentioned.  Adumbrativus ( talk ) 10:12, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – non–notable album (does not meet WP:NALBUM ) with highly dubious or blatant false claims, of an artist whose article was deleted via AFD. -- ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏ (ring-ring) 14:48, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - The musician's article was deleted because it was full of false claims about his importance and lists of fraudulent awards and honors.  Per WP:A9 all of his album articles could be deleted immediately because he is not notable.  Even so, this album article really stretches the truth in its own right.  Its every media mention, outside of the usual social media and self-upload services, are in unreliable and blatantly promotional publications.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 15:52, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Non-notable album but an artist deleted for being non-notable - said artist page apparently had sockpuppet edits and bogus claims, just like this page.  StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk ) 20:38, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Does not meet the standards of WP:NALBUM , especially now that the artist has been deemed non-notable and his awards proved to be dubious.  Michitaro ( talk ) 04:40, 4 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
Ana Iris Ortiz Livieres: Coverage is somewhat limited to her time as a model, and is trivial.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Women ,  and Fashion .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Paraguay-related deletion discussions .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:39, 16 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
Malado Maïga: There are also passing mentions of her club career ( 1 , 2 ), but nothing that indicates any sort of lasting notability.  Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:51, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:51, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 19:43, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete lacks indepth coverage, fails WP:GNG . -- Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 10:49, 30 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
Bukit Jalil National Secondary School: Existing sources show passing mentions only and a before comes up with nothing of note.  Theroadislong ( talk ) 17:17, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Malaysia .  Theroadislong ( talk ) 17:17, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It is a Malaysian article, you don't search Bukit Jalil National Secondary School which is the non-native name and expect to find a lot of things.  As per the Wikipedia article, the school is commonly referred to as 'SMK Bukit Jalil' and 'Sekolah Menengah Kebangsaan Bukit Jalil.'  Here are the materials/citations that I've not put and put some are in Malay and some are not.  In the mean time the article has been moved to draft.  https://www.mymrt.com.my/ms/info-truck-year/2018-ms/page/3/? post_type=mrt-info-truck https://bjalil.pimaxis.my/pendidikan.html https://www.limkokwing.net/cambodia/news/article/smk_bukit_jalil_students_visit_limkokwing_university https://www.thestar.com.my/metro/metro-news/2024/03/31/freak-thunderstorm-wreaks-havoc-in-government-housing-schemes-in-kl https://www.thestar.com.my/news/community/2006/10/27/latecomer-still-shines-in-handball https://unclekentang.com/blog/2020/03/11/taklimat-cpr-kepada-350-badan-unit-beruniform-smk-bukit-jalil/ http://kmz.com.my/? page_id=417 N niyaz ( talk ) 17:33, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 18:04, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment You have clearly misunderstood what we mean by significant coverage, all of the above are passing mentions only.  Theroadislong ( talk ) 18:08, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom, no sign of notability of any flavour.  -- DoubleGrazing ( talk ) 18:20, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom; notability nowhere near established.  Feline Hymnic ( talk ) 22:14, 27 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom; searching for further coverage under the "commonly referred to" names referenced in the first comment here doesn't dredge up anything supporting notability either.  Chiselinccc ( talk ) 06:21, 28 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
Dr. Feelgood World Tour '89–'90: Article was created in 2008, and then BLARred in 2021.  An attempt at restoring was then made in 2022, only to be BLARred once more roughly an hour later.  CycloneYoris talk!  22:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music .  CycloneYoris talk!  22:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails both WP:NTOUR and WP:GNG , as well as having needed additional citations for more than five years.  HorrorLover555 ( talk ) 22:46, 10 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , or possibly Redirect to Dr. Feelgood (album) if anyone is concerned about alternatives to deletion .  Per WP:NTOUR , this tour did not receive news coverage as a stand-alone event in its own time, being simply announced in conjunction with the album, nor has it gotten any historical treatments in the decades since.  It's telling that someone attempted to add attendance and revenue numbers for the various listed shows but left many of them blank, indicating that such info is probably not available.  Therefore, this article is not particularly useful for readers, in addition to being non-notable.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 14:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Non-notable, undersourced concert tour fails both WP:GNG and WP:CONCERT TOUR that was tagged as using primary references for seven years when it was first redirected back in March 2021.  Aspects ( talk ) 17:11, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It's amazing what you can learn from Wikipedia deletion discussions.  I now know that the Dr. Feelgood World Tour '89–'90 was not undertaken by Dr. Feelgood .  Phil Bridger ( talk ) 08:36, 14 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
International Workers' Unity – Fourth International: On a search for some, I only managed to find two books that even mention this organization: Contemporary Trotskyism and The Twilight of World Trotskyism , both by John Kelly.  Neither book provides any substantial detail; most of the mentions are within long lists of Trotskyist internationals, with the only real information being that some of the organization's affiliate sections broke away from it following its formation.  As far as I can tell, most of the articles that link to this article are also lists of Trotskyist internationals.  It only has one notable section, its Argentine one.  I don't think every obscure Trotskyist international needs a dedicated article, and given the complete dearth of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources, I think this could safely be deleted or redirected to Socialist Left (Argentina) .  Grnrchst ( talk ) 11:59, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics ,  and Social science .  Grnrchst ( talk ) 11:59, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] As original author I have no objections to deletion.  Secretlondon ( talk ) 12:09, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete — Per above.  Yue 🌙 05:53, 17 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
Shanti Bon, Hojai: Saurabh Saha 16:23, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: India and Assam .  Saurabh Saha 16:23, 9 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:15, 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!  19:35, 16 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
Don Kulasiri: No available sources to establish general notability.  IdiotSavant ( talk ) 10:16, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions .  IdiotSavant ( talk ) 10:21, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Sri Lanka .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 10:29, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Citation record does not support WP:PROF#C1 and I didn't see evidence of any other form of notability.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 19:40, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Kulasiri has been a full professor at Lincoln University since 1999.  My understanding is that full professors at NZ universities meet criterion 5.  Schwede 66 20:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] No.  There are thousands, if not millions, of full professors.  Being a full professor alone is not significant enough for WP:NPROF.  Shoerack ( talk ) 00:30, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Well, the number in NZ is considerably smaller than that, of course.  Waikato appears to have roughly 100 full professors, for instance.  Multiply that by the 8 universities in NZ, and ignore the fact that they're not all the same size, and you get probably less than 1000.  That said, I agree that full professor alone should not be considered enough.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 08:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Full professors in NZ are equivalent to distinguished/endowed professor in most Asian and North American universities and to a professor of a discipline in British universities, according to Academic ranks (Australia and New Zealand) .  Nurg ( talk ) 09:05, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] When I look there I see that it is tagged as dubious.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 05:03, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete — per David Eppstein's rationale.  Shoerack ( talk ) 00:30, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .   Meets WP:PROF#C5 per Schwede66 and Nurg.  Lincoln is a major institution of higher learning and research, and named chairs / distinguished professor appointments are rare in New Zealand.  Paora ( talk ) 11:01, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I do not see that it is significant enough to remain a Wikipedia article.  Villian Factman ( talk ) 11:36, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , fails WP:ANYBIO , also do not see why a NZ professor should be treated any differently from professors elsewhere.  Dan arndt ( talk ) 01:18, 25 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