hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Pussy torture: The best source used in the article looks to be this Cosmopolitan article which does not mention torture or bdsm.  Most of the rest of the sourcing is unreliable and/or self published.  Anything remotely reliable doesn't discuss "pussy torture," or is not significant coverage.  I suggest deletion with a merge of anything worthwhile to BDSM or some other target.  ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk ) 14:51, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletion discussions .  ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk ) 14:51, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete.  The article reads like a list and/or instruction manual, and has virtually no notable sources.  Cortador ( talk ) 21:30, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I've looked for reliable sources for this article, and I've come to the conclusion that it is not verifiable in terms of WP:RS , and that it is probably not notable enough for WP:GNG .  The sources that do exist result in an article that resembles an instruction manual contrary to WP:NOTGUIDE .  It contains a comparatively small amount of health risk information, and I'm concerned that this may violate WP:MEDRS .  Polly Tunnel ( talk ) 11:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  A specialized topic will have references in specialized publications, as this one does.  See also Murray, Thomas; Murrell, Thomas (1989-02-07).  The Language of Sadomasochism: A Glossary and Linguistic Analysis .  Bloomsbury Publishing USA.  ISBN 978-0-313-38783-8 .  Лисан аль-Гаиб ( talk ) 15:42, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Does that source actually have significant coverage of the term?  Searching the work via Google books returns no results for "pussy torture."  ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk ) 16:09, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Лисан аль-Гаиб , I just checked the source, and pussy torture, cunt torture, vaginal torture, vulva torture, and female genitorture are not in the book.  I've reverted your use of it as a source in the article and restored it to the further reading section.  ScottishFinnishRadish ( talk ) 21:24, 19 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Mandagua: Hey man im josh ( talk ) 16:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Brazil .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 16:10, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , undistinguished career so not likely with significant coverage.  Geschichte ( talk ) 21:47, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 10:05, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 10:06, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Per WP:GNG Svartner ( talk ) 16:58, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Also, almost orphaned.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 15:10, 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
Lap Corner, Indiana: Anyway, there's nothing there and it seems there never was.  Mangoe ( talk ) 14:33, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:48, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong delete Not a single mention in the detailed history of Clay and Owen Counties: [17] , and nothing at the site now in satellite images.   Does not appear on USGS topo maps until 1957: [18] , and in no map is it shown as anything other than an intersection.   The article is a flat-out falsehood.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 00:32, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Agreed, nothing found.  James.folsom ( talk ) 22:19, 21 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
Dean Karr: IMDB and MVDB are user generated and should not be used at all.  Allmusic lists everything, so while it may be ok for verification it doesn't get us anywhere for notability.  Websites owned or operated by the subject are possibly ok primary sources but again, no use as far as notability.  VideoStatic, I'd never heard of but the coverage there is just crediting this person for their role in various projects, there's no depth of coverage about this person.  My own search didn't turn up anything any better.  He certainly seems to be prolific in his industry, but somehow apparently has not been the subject of significant coverage.  Just Step Sideways from this world .... .  today 18:24, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Bands and musicians , Film , Visual arts ,  and Photography .  Just Step Sideways from this world .... .  today 18:24, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Working commercial photographer, with a too long list of everything they've ever worked on here...  Wiki isn't for your CV.  I find nothing covering this individual, not even PR items.  There just isn't coverage about them.  Delete for lack of sourcing.  What's used now in the article is primary or simply a name drop...  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:02, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - None of the sources are reliable, and as mentioned in the nom, not SIGCOV.  The article is PROMO for a commercial photographer just doing his job.  Performing one's job as a creative does not automatically confer notability.  I saw on his website a claim that his work was "the subject of an exhibition at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) which gave hope that he might pass NARTIST if he were in the collection and other collections could be found at notable museums or national galleries.  However a search of LACMA's collection resulted in nothing, and a basic search of his name on their website revealed no hits at all [31] .  Netherzone ( talk ) 20:28, 15 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This article is interchangeable with an IMDB page...  WP:NOTRESUME (if the people in the first AFD were correct in assuming this to maybe be autobiographical.) The fact this survived so long after its first AFD is amazing.  IceBergYYC ( talk ) 10:43, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Jason Parrish: Zero actual sources, the only source repeatedly used in the article is a link to the author's website.  ULPS ( talk ) 14:17, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions .  ULPS ( talk ) 14:17, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete, no book reviews, nor mentions of any kind in Gnews, Gnewspaers or Gscholar for this individual.  Not passing AUTHOR.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Georgia (U.S. state)-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:36, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Indeed, Mr. ULPS, Parrish lacks the citation-laden mantle of notability we demand.  As we consign this parochial author to obscurity, we might ponder if our policies, in their stringent purity, serve the vast encyclopedia we steward, or paradoxically, undermine its comprehensive ambition.  For are we not chroniclers of all knowledge, however humble the source?  Jack4576 ( talk ) 14:43, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] A rose by any other name still requires citations saying as such, for we are just dust in the wind.  Sic transit gloria mundi.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:53, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Jason B. Parrish : The author has no individual notability.  But the redirect that was there initially is to a notable individual.  BangJan1999 15:54, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per Oaktree's searches.  Only source provided is his own website.  Fails WP:AUTHOR .  LibStar ( talk ) 02:29, 17 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Oaktree b and LibStar.  Doesn't pass WP:NAUTHOR .  No reliable, independent, or significant-coverage-demonstrative sources can I find.  Nythar ( 💬 - 🍀 ) 18:09, 19 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I'm not finding any reliable sources proving notability. -- SouthernNights ( talk ) 16:15, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Restore redirect to Jason B. Parrish .  I'm not coming up with anything at all.  SWinxy ( talk ) 20:04, 22 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
São Bento Fountain: I've nominated the article because the subject does not appear to be notable.  The article was created without any references in 2009 and I could not find any sources which suggest that the fountain is notable.  Golem08 ( talk ) 19:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture , Christianity ,  and Portugal .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 20:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , inclined to agree on this one, as can find scarcely anything about it which would even marginally assert any notability.  There wasn't a single content edit over a 10 year period which indicates to me this is not a notable topic.  Searching under the native name of "Fonte de São Bento" returns mostly either social media or tourist-related sites.  I'd be interested to hear what Joseolgon , the creator, thinks all these years later.  Bungle ( talk • contribs ) 21:15, 11 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Note that it does not appear to be heritage-listed.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 13:11, 12 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Source : There's a short paragraph in Portuguese about the fountain aided by a graph in this Olinda history book .  Left guide ( talk ) 04:00, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] That source is about a fountain of the same name in Olinda , Brazil.  Sojourner in the earth ( talk ) 06:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Thanks for pointing that out, I didn’t originally realize those are two different fountains, my mistake.  In that case, delete .  Left guide ( talk ) 07:22, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I think it's very likely that print sources exist, but I can't find anything online, so I have to ! vote delete for now.  The article is short enough that it can be easily recreated if more sources are found.  Sojourner in the earth ( talk ) 06:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – There are no sources on pt.wiki, I believe that any mention of the fountain must be part of the main article from Mira, Portugal .  Svartner ( talk ) 04:49, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - per above.  The article is a mess and completely unsourced, making me wonder if it is even notable.  ❤History Theorist❤ 05:12, 16 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
Clap note: It has been unreferenced and tagged for notability for many years, and there don't seem to be the amount of sources available to show notability.  Boleyn ( talk ) 07:00, 9 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Finance-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 07:54, 9 June 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!  04:30, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : no sources, seems to be made up.  — Alien333 ( what I did & why I did it wrong ) 10:19, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : no references to this term that I can find online other than this article, no matches in Google Books or archive.org.  Assuming it existed in the first place, it doesn't seem to have entered public usage.  Adam Sampson ( talk ) 15:17, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
The Advisory Board Company: What isn't in the article mirrors what is -mergers, acquisitions and other  business transactions.  There are a lot of mentions from when Zients was appointed to the Obama, Biden administrations respectively, but none of it is about the company.  None of the awards are notable ones and I'm unable to ind ORG-depth coverage.  A redirect to David_G._Bradley#The_Advisory_Board_Company where its history is summarized and sourced wouldn't be bad, but I'm not sure it's particularly helpful to the reader.  Star Mississippi 19:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness , Organizations , Companies ,  and Washington, D.C. .  Star Mississippi 19:26, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:43, 3 September 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!  20:46, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Eflex9ja: Youknowwhoistheman ( talk ) 15:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of News media-related deletion discussions .  Youknowwhoistheman ( talk ) 15:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and Nigeria .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 15:39, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I was unable to find anything beyond social media linked to Eflex9ja.  I believe it fails to meet the basic notability criteria .  Pichpich ( talk ) 15:58, 25 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy delete : Non notable at all.  Wonder when it was founded and no qualitative source to be inclusive on an Encyclopedia Otuọcha ( talk ) 19:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Otuọcha @ Pichpich @ Skynxnex @ Youknowwhoistheman Please, i have added references to the page to validate my search.  You can also check use the further readings for more information.  The website is https://www.eflex9ja.com.ng you can visit and read more as well as search on google for other external links.  Thank you all.  Jayofpedia ( talk ) 10:43, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Here, we always appreciate efforts.  As it stands, the page fails WP:WEB and even our WP:GNG .  you can read more on the welcome page to see the links for better editing or you click here .  Thanks Otuọcha ( talk ) 11:07, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] These references are no good.  faqabout.me is self-published and we are looking for in-depth coverage in third-party sources, aruwaab9ja.com.ng is a blog (not reliable) and in any case, that link does not provide any coverage of eflex9ja, the link to Jassen Japhethnk's GitHub does not mention eflex9ja (and in any case, is self-published) and finally, the link to radiomhz.com does not provide any significant coverage but even worse, it shows a link to "Eflex9ja FM online live radio" but that link is broken.  This is not even close to what we need to meet WP:GNG .  Pichpich ( talk ) 18:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Tunas Bangsa School: Thank you.  ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools and Indonesia .  ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 02:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 02:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No sources cited, fails WP:GNG as there is nothing on the page that distinguishes notability on why it would have its own page.  Noorullah ( talk ) 09:01, 5 February 2024 (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 05:57, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : School article of unclear notability, lacking independent refs, and a search turned up no significant RS coverage.  Dialectric ( talk ) 10:19, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Just existence is not enough.  Lorstaking ( talk ) 13:16, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
International reactions to the 2012 United States presidential election: This page is a case of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:INDISCRIMINATE .  Wow ( talk ) 06:46, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and United States of America .  Wow ( talk ) 06:46, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 2012 United States presidential election (and remove the "main article" link from that page).  I am mixed on this.  The nom's assessment of NOTNEWS is fully accurate the way the article is structured, and there's actually a bit of SYNTH because of the extreme level of primary sourcing.  However, there is certainly secondary coverage of international reactions we could use to construct a fine article on this if someone was so inclined.  I am hopeful that by preserving history with a redirect we can leave breadcrumbs for someone to do just that.  — siro χ o 07:36, 19 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:57, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] just delete The basic issue is that, unsurprisingly, 99% of the reactions were routine congratulations.  Even what negative reactions there were are just people talking.  There is just nothing here worth saving, and the precedent is deletion.  Mangoe ( talk ) 02:04, 27 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Nothing encyclopedic, just regular political chatter with no analysis or context.   And I don't see there being any significant secondary analysis of this topic anywhere.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 15:31, 27 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
David Julian Price: This may be independent, but is extremely brief.  This is reasonably in-depth, but not independent.  From what I can see, they are quite some way from meeting the requirements of WP:BIO .  SmartSE ( talk ) 15:39, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism and United Kingdom .  – dudhhr talk contribs she her 15:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  Couldn't find SIGCOV on him in RS either, and it's been a minor struggle with the article creator to move it on from this sort of thing to something resembling a neutral article, suggesting UPE.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 15:57, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Rakan Daqar: Untamed1910 ( talk ) 22:37, 10 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Iran .  Shellwood ( talk ) 22:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Could not find any reliable sources and it fails WP:GNG and should be deleted Untamed1910 ( talk ) 20:51, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy delete : The creator and the only contributor has been CU-blocked.  The page should have been protected from IPs removing the speedy deletion tag until it would be reviewed.  I'm not sure if this was recreated here and merits salt, but in the Simple English Wikipedia, it was deleted for 4 times and salted twice: [4] Aintabli ( talk ) 10:37, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Aintabli : You may be right, but Ponyo , the CU who made the blocks, did not say what other accounts, if any, had been used, so it's impossible for mere mortals such as you and me to know whether a block was being evaded at the time when the article was created.  JBW ( talk ) 10:18, 15 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That's correct.  I did not think of that when voting although I should have.  Aintabli ( talk ) 12:04, 15 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , really can't find any reliable and independent sources about him to count towards wikinotability.  Aintabli ( talk ) 12:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete.  (1) I checked the cited sources, with the aid of Google translate, as I can't read Persian.  At least one of them is on a site selling Rakan Daqar's work, and at least one of them is on a site which describes itself as a "public relations" site.  None of them gives substantially more information about Rakan Daqar than the fact that his books have been published.  (2) In case there are good sources out there which haven't been cited in the article, I searched for information on Google, using the Persian form of Rakan Daqar's name.  I found more of the same kind of thing, plus the Wikipedia article, Facebook, a blog, etc.  In short, I was unable to find any substantial coverage of him anywhere, in any kind of source, reliable or otherwise.  JBW ( talk ) 10:13, 15 July 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