hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Al-Wahs: PaulGamerBoy360 ( talk ) 23:22, 27 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] comment It's not clear to me what 'Uzlah (the type of division) really means. The person who wrote that article is gone and we really need a subject matter expert to resolve this. That said at this point I'm not going to oppose deletion. Mangoe ( talk ) 03:18, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Dhi As Sufal District . Someone mass-produced a ton of these at Template:Ibb Governorate , but if even the main district article is a microstub, it's not clear that we should have articles on sub-districts like this too. 'Uzlah doesn't give indication of their actual role or notability. Reywas92 Talk 15:16, 28 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! 23:26, 4 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The reason to delete is unclear - short articles are acceptable and the sources are not obviously unreliable. It's also more useful when looking for information about a place to have just the information about the place in one article than have to search through a longer page (particularly where a different spelling or transliteration may be used). The district page would become too long if it had to include all subdistricts and villages. Peter James ( talk ) 08:24, 7 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I second Peter James' reasons, and would add that randomly deleting places in a war zone could be perceived as POV.  There are 3000 people...maybe you can find better sources.  142.126.146.27 ( talk ) 17:02, 8 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: I agree that there is nothing wrong with stub articles as long as they are reliably sourced.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:11, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] none of the three sources are reliable sources PaulGamerBoy360 ( talk ) 19:35, 17 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:21, 18 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Amsterdam Stories USA: One minor award and showings at film festivals does not make a film notable.  Nothing significant in the way of reviews found.  Donald D23 talk to me 22:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and United States of America .  Donald D23 talk to me 22:52, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:27, 23 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The guideline about notability of films states among other possible indications of notability: "The film was given a commercial re-release, or screened in a festival, at least five years after initial release ."  That was 3 times the case here and that is sourced.  — MY, OH, MY!  (mushy yank) — 21:41, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:32, 30 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: no consensus
2024 Super Formula Lights: H4MCHTR ( talk ) 14:13, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions .  H4MCHTR ( talk ) 14:13, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:28, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify - I would draftify it until the calendar is announced but it would be a shame to delete it since there's already some information on the new car specifications.  Formula Downforce ( talk ) 15:19, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - With the calendar now announced, I retract my original opinion.  H4MCHTR ( talk ) 09:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge notable portion into Super Formula Lights .  I don't see the calendar itself as being notable.  Owen× ☎ 19:54, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Now that the calendar has been announced, and the nom has retracted their original proposal.  CycloneYoris talk!  06:52, 27 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Dus Bahane 2.0: Songs with a billion views like " Cham Cham " have no articles (views alone mean nothing).  No independent notability.  The only information about the song is that it is a remake of another song.  Propose to merge this short article to Baaghi 3#Soundtrack .  These song articles created by the same user should also be deleted and be merged to their respective films.  Ek Chumma → Housefull 4#Soundtrack Tu Hai → Mohenjo Daro (film)#Soundtrack Aashiqui Aa Gayi → Radhe Shyam (soundtrack) The reason why they should all be deleted because the songs don't have independent notability.  Half of the sources are from YouTube.  Other sources are from unreliable sources.  None of these songs won any awards.  There are 5 to 6 songs+ per film and we can't have a Wikipedia article on a song simply because you like the song.  DareshMohan ( talk ) 12:31, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I think the songs have sufficient notability to be kept.  A reminder to the nominator: If you want additional articles to be deleted, you need to add the appropriate AfD notice to each of them.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 16:50, 13 June 2023 (UTC) Postscript: I added the AfD notice to the three additional articles because the nominator hadn't.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 21:12, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and India .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:59, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Per WP:ATD-R , the references in the critical reception review all the songs in each film and not just these ones in particular (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jigelu Rani ).  What makes these specific songs more notable than the other ones in the same film?  See: Ek Chumma#Critical reviews Tu Hai#Critical reviews Aashiqui Aa Gayi#Critical reviews DareshMohan ( talk ) 07:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:10, 20 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  Nominator is reminded that every article that is being considered needs to be tagged as being part of this discussion.  Also, I don't see how an article can "be deleted and be merged", I think you have that backwards.  It would also be helpful if, when you make a nomination, you use the tools available to do some deletion sorting so that editors interested in this subject can be aware of this AFD.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  19:41, 27 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: no consensus
Vinh Khuat: 141 Pr { contribs } 13:28, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Vietnam ,  and Germany .  Shellwood ( talk ) 14:50, 15 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!  08:40, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep .  The sources in the article might not show notability, but a Google search brings up a ton of results in Vietnamese media.  Unfortunately, I do not speak Vietnamese so I cannot assess the reliability of those sources, but it's sufficient to presume multiple reliable secondary exist, thus fulfilling the notability criteria.  [30] [31] [32] [33] @ Praseodymium-141 : have you checked the sources in the Vietnamese page ?  -- Broc ( talk ) 13:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 11:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Rob Cantor: His Shia LaBeouf song has 82M views on YouTube but WP:NMUSICIAN doesn't seem to count YouTube-successful songs for musician notability; unless that is valid I don't see a path to notability based on current coverage.  DemonDays64 ( talk • contribs ) 05:51, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  DemonDays64 ( talk • contribs ) 05:53, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Well, I found this page because I wanted to look him up from Spotify.  So if this page wasn’t here, I wouldn’t see the connections as easily.  2601:1C0:5682:1240:F543:8AF6:8866:18BB ( talk ) 22:28, 3 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 08:42, 14 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!  05:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] While I get at he is not the most notable artist in the world, there are multiple other Wikipedia articles that refer to him such as the band Tally Hall, the Shia Labeouf song and I believe Shia Labeouf's article itself.  I guess I would just like to see the rabbit hole of starting at Shia Labeouf and winding up at Rob Cantor stay open.  2607:FB91:2D87:47F0:7009:CC75:11CE:165C ( talk ) 21:06, 27 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Tally Hall , Longhornsg ( talk ) 07:19, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , he follows WP:NMUSICIAN criteria 1(?), 3, 8, and 10.  Koopastar ( talk ) 02:11, 24 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:BLP2E .  3E, really, I also found this which was reprinted in Business Insider.  casualdejekyll 00:57, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, North America 1000 15:56, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] He also is notable for creating music for the Disney Junior channel on the show Happy Monster Band and multiple Disney Channel albums 2603:7081:6D07:F3FC:40B1:24FA:CDA7:7708 ( talk ) 03:27, 31 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: no consensus
Awaz Sayeed: WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Could the nominator comment on why they believe there is a "Lack of notability" because honestly it isn't very helpful.  Has a local language search been performed to check for reviews of their seven books?  Generally authors who have been translated are notable, as are authors who have theses written about them.  This article has been around since 2007.  Espresso Addict ( talk ) 14:18, 25 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The only 2 sources located in any language of wikipedia are both Permenent Dead Links PaulGamerBoy360 ( talk ) 00:14, 26 October 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!  01:50, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] ● Keep- per A.B 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 19:06, 7 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This is about all I could find [14] , but I'm unsure if it's the same individual.  The lack of sourcing/inline citations in the article doesn't help and the external links are not RS.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 03:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Alternate transliteration is ʻIvaz̤ Saʻīd — siro χ o 03:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Notable.  Rekhta , the online encyclopedia of Urdu literature, has an e-book about Sayeed available for download.  Rekhta transliterates Sayeed's name as "Ewaz Saeed".  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 03:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ A. B. Can you prove that these are the same person 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 15:55, 6 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I had the same question so I compared pictures of Sayeed over the decades.  It’s the same guy.  — A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 15:58, 6 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] ok 😎😎PaulGamerBoy360😎😎 ( talk ) 19:05, 7 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep while adding a bunch of maintenance tags and clearing out a lot of the unreferenced bio.  Might also be worthwhile to move from Awaz Sayeed to Ewaz Saeed per A.B. above.  Kazamzam ( talk ) 17:21, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:52, 8 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 09:57, 15 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: no consensus
Vanakkam Tamizha: Tirishan ( talk ) 20:17, 4 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 23:41, 11 June 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!  23:06, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Bobherry Talk My Edits 14:20, 25 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: no consensus
Commercial National Financial: Doesn't appear to be notable.  Pepper Beast (talk) 18:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance , Business ,  and Pennsylvania .  Pepper Beast (talk) 18:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Yes, this is a holding company.  Ordinarily, if the holding company is not separately notable from its principal business, it could get merged into the article on that holding.  However, we don't have an article on Commercial Bank & Trust of PA.  From what I can find, it's a 90 y/o company, but it's quite small ($28 million market cap, miniscule trading volume).  Not exactly sure what to do here, but I would want to examine the sources on the Commercial Bank & Trust of PA a bit more closely before deciding what to do here.  — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 18:01, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Daniel ( talk ) 21:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist, unless this one results in additional participation.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:31, 27 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: no consensus
East Asia Climate Partnership: Seems like it will be impossible to update as there is no recent information on this topic - there is no independent coverage of the Partnership, and the only information I can find on it was last updated in 2009.  As such, I feel the article doesn't meet notability criteria, and there is no info available to update it to meet quality/accuracy criteria.  OliverEastwood talk 12:48, 7 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Environment and Korea .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:42, 7 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I fixed source #2 by adding an archive link, but translating archived pages is not possible so I cannot read it.  PaulGamerBoy360 ( talk ) 02:32, 8 October 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 12:48, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Asia and South Korea .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:24, 14 October 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!  06:59, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Oppose .   Searching for it in Korean ("동아시아기후파트너십") shows numerous respectable independent sources covering it.  It's unfortunate the article is poorly sourced though; it needs some work but I think it's a notable enough topic.  (I probably won't do the work) toobigtokale ( talk ) 02:26, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  07:28, 28 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus
Loree Rodkin: In addition, sources in the article (and those that I could find online) seem to be hype and not sustained , or they are passing mentions ( ... which was designed by Loree Rodkin ... ) WP refs search returns most recent result as 2014, for example.  Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs ) 00:06, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Coverage in the Daily Mail, New York Post, both are non RS.  Chicago Tribune looked promising but it's a Q&A.  I can't find stories about her that we can use for notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:56, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Reads promotional in nature with all primary sources; doesn't tell us why the subject is notable.  sixty nine • whaddya want?  • 04:37, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Women , California ,  and Illinois .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:33, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] FYI - I have added sources on her later work with Michèle Lamy and the grandson of Kilian Hennessy , and some other content, which includes some articles from British Vogue , Interview magazine, Los Angeles Times , and Hollywood Reporter .  Bridget (talk) 18:58, 1 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Article already cites this good LATimes profile .  Additional sources include Chicago Tribune (only the second half is interview), W magazine profile , and Arab News (combination interview profile).  Hameltion ( talk | contribs ) 02:42, 2 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] These are indeed all interviews/promotional pieces, and the Chicago Tribune link doesn't work.  sixty nine • whaddya want?  • 23:42, 3 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Not really, these are mostly much more profile than Q&A, and there's no indication they're promotional in the sense of not being reliable independent sources ... she seems to be a well-covered public figure ( archive of Tribune interview) Hameltion ( talk | contribs ) 13:30, 4 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  08:35, 5 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 12:05, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Hameltion's sources.  Arbitrarily0 ( talk ) 09:50, 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: no consensus
SPIN (cable system): Fails the general notability requirement.  - UtherSRG (talk) 17:22, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology , Internet , Oceania ,  and New Zealand .  UtherSRG (talk) 17:22, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment I'm not hellbent on keep this as a standalone article but we out to keep some record of proposed/unrealized submarine communications cables somewhere .  Could be nice to divide List of international submarine communications cables into groups like "active", discontinued", and "unrealized".  Crunchydillpickle🥒 ( talk ) 07:00, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I would be good with that and making this a redirect to the list.  - UtherSRG (talk) 12:16, 22 November 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!  21:08, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep this is well worth documenting AaronVick ( talk ) 08:58, 30 November 2023 (UTC) —

Discussion outcome: no consensus