hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Craig Warren Smith : 17:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Academics and educators .  •C y b erw o l f• talk?  17:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  This looks like the right criteria should be either PROF or AUTHOR, but I'm not seeing notability through either.  Citation counts for people with the same name (who may or may not be the same person) are not enough to convince for WP:PROF#C1 , and I can find no reviews for anything listed as a "book" in the article ( Digital Corporate Citizenship appears to be his dissertation, I can find no evidence that it was actually published as a book by IU Press, I can find no convincing evidence that The Second Wireless Revolution exists as a book at all, and while Getting Grants does appear to exist I can't find any reviews of it).  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 18:23, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Incidentally, we do have an article Meaningful Broadband about some of his work.  If it were notable we could consider a redirect to it, but I think it should probably be deleted as well.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 18:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Meaningful Broadband .  I think there's a good argument to be made that Meaningful Broadband is the "body of work" we should be judging him on, which is to say that if it's notable, he is too (though I do think we should redirect this article to that one if so, given the volume of unsourced content).  I suspect it is notable, since it's been deployed in at least two countries, but I agree that the references currently in that article don't show it.  -- asilvering ( talk ) 18:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and United States of America . Skynxnex ( talk ) 19:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: China , Thailand , California , Massachusetts , Washington ,  and Washington, D.C. . WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Was hoping to find book reviews to satisfy AUHTOR, I can only find where to buy them. I don't see notability. Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Unable to find notability-- VViking Talk Edits 19:27, 5 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: redirect
WCFC-CA : Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 20:29, 22 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Christianity ,  and Illinois .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 20:29, 22 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Article is currently completely unsourced and I have been unable to locate any useful secondary sources.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 21:43, 22 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Total Living Network Network is now regional-cable only and has been for over a decade, and I had considered redirecting long before.  Nate • ( chatter ) 23:04, 22 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: redirect
Adolf Hitler Fan Club : (The club isn't real, insofar as the club has only one member and she died. There is only a tin cup for donations and that's not notable. The cup isn't even on display, so far as I can tell.)  The citations provided are mere mentions.  Efforts to redirect this have failed.  Chris Troutman ( talk ) 14:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Arts-related deletion discussions .  Chris Troutman ( talk ) 14:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] There appears to be very little here that isn't already in Pauline Smith (artist) .  Could what little extra there is here be merged to that article?  Oliver Phile ( talk ) 15:28, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Oliver Phile : That was my goal but BabiesCon has

Discussion outcome: redirect
Nick Trenkel : The most I found was a few sentences here from his high school football days.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 18:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union ,  and Canada .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 18:40, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Canada national rugby union players Coverage does seem to be limited, despite his World Cup appearance and brief European career, I'd imagine there is some stuff offline, but redirect is fine for me.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 09:26, 12 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: redirect
Mac Tonight Party : Deauthorized .  ( talk ) 22:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions .  Deauthorized .  ( talk ) 22:57, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Hong Kong-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I tried to find sources including using some Chinese keywords to find local press, and found nothing.  South China Morning Post mentioned the campaign got an advertising award but that was just name-checking without content.  Lots of plush toys available for sale, cute but not WP:RS .  Redirect for all the good reasons given by @ Cunard .  I don't think the existence on McDonald's website does anything but prove it's not a hoax.  Oblivy ( talk ) 06:14, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Mac Tonight#Reintroduction in Southeast Asia (2006–2010) (with the history preserved under the redirect) , where the subject is already mentioned, per Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion .  Mac Tonight Party is discussed on the website of McDonald's Hong Kong: "Mac Tonight Party :: 麥當勞香港" .  13 November 2019.  Archived from the original on 2019-11-13 .  Retrieved 2024-01-27 .  I did not find significant coverage in independent reliable sources about Mac Tonight Party.  A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow editors to selectively merge any content that can be reliably sourced to the target article.  A redirect with the history preserved under the redirect will allow the redirect to be undone if significant coverage in reliable sources is found in the future.  Cunard ( talk ) 08:36, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect.  Not finding significant coverage or evidence of notability, I would agree this should redirect to Mac Tonight#Reintroduction in Southeast Asia (2006–2010) .  No objection to preserving the edit history.  Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  05:45, 19 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: redirect
Southern Pacific 1269 : (The single published source is a 23-page photo book, and GNG requires multiple reliable source.)  Also fails notability under WP:TWP/MOS ; there is no evidence of this individual locomotive being superlative or recognized as historically significant.  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 12:08, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Transportation and California .  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 12:08, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I've added references from three more newspaper articles and two more books, which demonstrate that the subject meets WP:GNG .  Opolito ( talk ) 13:50, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks for adding citations.  Unfortunately, these do not appear to support the case for notability.  As for the Arcadia books ( Niles Canyon Railway and Sacramento's Southern Pacific Shops ), numerous RS Noticeboard discussions express the consensus that many Arcadia books are the equivalent of self-published material and thus to be used with caution if at all.  (See [38] , [39] , [40] .)  Moreover, these books only mention No. 1269 briefly in passing or in photo captions and do not appear to provide significant coverage .  Western Railroader is not a newspaper, it's a iarchive:western-railroader-february-1962-deep-creek-railroad/page/n7/mode/2up self-described railfan newsletter .  Fan publications are generally questionable for notability.  (I am not questioning it as a source for factual information, just as evidence of the subject's notability.)  Finally, since you appear to have the source but it is not online, can you provide more details about how the coverage in the Auburn Journal is significant?  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 15:24, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment If this is not individually notable it should be merged to a sourced 1-2 sentences at List of preserved Southern Pacific Railroad rolling stock#Preserved steam locomotives and redirected there.  Thryduulf ( talk ) 11:35, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I support that approach.  Redirect Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 11:58, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of preserved Southern Pacific Railroad rolling stock as an alternative to deletion.  Trainsandotherthings ( talk ) 13:29, 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: redirect
Toyota H-Series Transmission : A before finds no independent coverage of the product and the article relies on primary Toyota sources.  Possible re-direct?  Theroadislong ( talk ) 08:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Products and Transportation .  Theroadislong ( talk ) 08:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Toyota transmissions#H-series : Fails NPRODUCT, no sufficient secondary sources.  User3749 ( talk ) 08:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] All additional sources would just be repeating what the primary sources state.  It's a build spec, not something that is subjective.  It's an objective fact.  12DionneJ ( talk ) 16:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Toyota transmissions#H-series : As an WP:ATD .  Fails WP:NPRODUCT .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 20:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Toyota transmissions#H-series : As with the other pages in this series at AfD right now, the sourcing just isn't there to support an independent article.  Feel free to leave a {{ talkback }} for me if someone manages to turn up a few GNG sources, but I wasn't able to find any.  184.152.68.190 ( talk ) 01:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of Toyota transmissions#H-series as topic fails notability guidelines.  Toadette ( Let's discuss together! ) 19:31, 3 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: redirect
Henry Ayres : Even this claim of importance seems improbable, since the term didn't come into use as defined today until  May 1894 .  Toddst1 ( talk ) 15:42, 27 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect .  These kind of nominations are very tedious for all concerned.  If a thorough WP:BEFORE has been conducted and no in-depth sources can be found, then WP:BOLD should be the way to go and in this case, redirected to List of English cricketers (1826–1840) .  PRODing or AfDing the article isn't really a constructive use of everyone's time, including the nominators.  StickyWicket ( talk ) 16:07, 27 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Cricket ,  and England .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:17, 27 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  First-class cricket was officially adopted as the term to describe major cricket in May 1894 by the MCC, though limited to matches in the United Kingdom.  In 1947, the term was further defined by the ICC to encompass matches outside the United Kingdom, with individual cricket boards of the Test playing nations having the power to grant first-class status to matches (which remains the case to this day amongst the now 12 Full Members of the ICC).  It is worth noting that the 1947 definition does not provide retrospective first-class status to pre-1894 matches, however, more recently the ICC allowed the Association of Cricket Statisticians and Historians to retrospectively apply first-class status to matches before 1894.  Therefore, the first ever first-class match is retrospectively dated as Hampshire v England in 1772.  So this player and the team he played for are first-class.  So that part of the nomination is incorrect.  StickyWicket ( talk ) 16:25, 27 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect per Spiderone's decision.  CastJared ( talk ) 17:16, 27 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of English cricketers (1826–1840)#A Unless anything else can be dug up on the subject that we don't already have (at least we have a YoB to go on from the christening) then I'm at redirect for now.  Obviously a suitable redirect exists here per WP:ATD .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 10:23, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of English cricketers (1826–1840)#A would be the best option here.  There might well be some sourcing out there in Sussex books, but I certainly don't have access to them.  The list has already had details and sources added so there's nothing really to merge to it iirc.  Blue Square Thing ( talk ) 11:19, 1 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: redirect
What Have We Become? (song) : Created by a SPA who appears to be behind several articles related to Zarah (entertainer) , none of which appear to be notable.  The best source here, American Songwriter , is an article about the song which is allegedly the influence for this one... naturally, it has nothing to do with this song and doesn't mention Zarah at all.  Once you remove this and the source from Zarah's own website, we are left with four sources, none of which pass RS, and all of which are PR sites that advertise for submissions for review – the interviews in Illustrate and A&R Factory (something of a giveaway there) are anonymous.  Looking at the profile of the writer behind the Turtle Tempo piece, it states that her job at the website is being "tasked with approaching upcoming artists, offering them a chance to garner a larger fanbase via the medium of paid reviews or interviews." [17] So all of this is appears to be paid-for promotion, and there is no evidence of independent notability.  Richard3120 ( talk ) 16:33, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions .  Richard3120 ( talk ) 16:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions .  Richard3120 ( talk ) 16:35, 13 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Zarah (entertainer) per nomination.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 22:22, 13 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: redirect
KCYM-LD : Let'srun ( talk ) 21:53, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Iowa .  Let'srun ( talk ) 21:53, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.  : yet another run-of-the-mill all-diginet 2010s-started DTV America/HC2/Innovate station with neither any significant coverage nor the potential for any.  Yet another nominal survivor of a bulk nomination from last year .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:03, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp. would be the best choice.  TH1980 ( talk ) 01:52, 25 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of stations owned by Innovate Corp.  : clear lack of WP:SIGCOV outside of its parent org.  She was a fairy 09:47, 2 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: redirect
Princess Augusta of Schwarzburg-Sondershausen : It's a repeat of information at George I, Prince of Waldeck and Pyrmont and consists solely of genealogical information.  Fails WP:GNG .  DrKay ( talk ) 19:16, 7 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Royalty and nobility and Germany .  DrKay ( talk ) 19:16, 7 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Curbon7 ( talk ) 21:30, 7 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , should not be deleted.  the Princess  Augusta of Schwarzburg-Sondershausen is a historical person and is of interest for a online bibliotheca like Wikipedia.  -- 92.76.102.53 ( talk ) 21:44, 12 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, RL0919 ( talk ) 21:44, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , per 92.76.102.53 - I shall also add that there are short sections ("Early life" and "Later life") pertaining to her life.  Scribbie ( talk ) 22:12, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : I have added extra information prior to her early life and later life so it isn’t a copy of George I, Prince of Waldeck and Pyrmont .  Most of it is about her and her family.  Therefore doesn’t fit wp:NOTGENEALOGY .  My other account reason :
 Princess Augusta of Schwarzburg-Sondershausen's article should definitely stay on Wikipedia for a variety of reasons.  Firstly, she holds historical significance as a prominent figure in the 18th century, with her marriage and connections to other ruling houses.  Additionally, her article is mostly cited, providing reliable sources for readers to explore further.  Preserving her legacy ensures that future generations can learn about her accomplishments and the broader historical context.  YorkDr ( talk ) 21:16, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify : while it's no longer a clear-cut case of WP:NOTGENEALOGY , the early life content is still very brief and uncited.  With more citations and a cleaned-up or removed "marriage and issue" section it might pass notability Dan • ✉ 01:53, 17 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : beyond the case of WP:NOTGENEALOGY .  She was a historical princess, unlike today's seemingly insignificant or powerless constitutional monarchy.  If you have a penchant for article deletion, please AfD them.  Thanks.  85.229.188.50 ( talk ) 13:24, 19 December 2023 (UTC) ( Blocked sockpuppet of

Discussion outcome: redirect
Sam Hanna : The majority of the sources used in the article are primary, and a quick Google search doesn't give much information that prove the character's notability.  Spinixster (chat!) 14:54, 12 July 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 .  Spinixster (chat!) 14:54, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete completely non-notable.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 16:19, 12 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge and redirect to List of NCIS: Los Angeles characters .  Not too insistent on merge since it's just a plot summary.  WP:FANCRUFT .  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 05:45, 16 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: redirect
New Libertarian Manifesto : All of its references are primary sources , with only brief one-line reviews taken from the "Praise" section of the book itself.  I found only one passing reference to it in only one of my sources ( Routledge Handbook of Anarchy and Anarchist Thought , 2020), as a small part of a broader section about Konkin.  As this manifesto doesn't appear to meet our notability guidelines , I propose that this article be merged into/redirected to the article on Samuel Edward Konkin III .  Grnrchst ( talk ) 18:11, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Libertarianism , Politics ,  and Economics .  Grnrchst ( talk ) 18:11, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:07, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Samuel Edward Konkin III#Political opinions .  There is no independent notability to this subject that I can find in any secondary sources, and there is nothing worthwhile to merge.  For policy rationale, this article appears to fall best under WP:PROMO and certainly fails all five criteria under WP:GNG .  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 15:26, 28 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: redirect
Priscille Kreto : The subject has made at least one appearance for the Ivory Coast women's national football team .  I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage on the subject from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 22:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Ivory Coast .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 22:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect' as above.  Giant Snowman 19:05, 26 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: redirect