hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Kagiso Mohale: Ineligible for PROD.  No suitable redirect exists AFAIK.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:02, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Cricket ,  and South Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:02, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as what JP has found alone seems to indicate that it passes GNG Me Da Wikipedian ( talk ) 09:59, 2 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - it appears the Cricinfo spelling of his first name is incorrect, on CricketArchive as Kagisho Mohale and a search of that name shows up more coverage.  This , that and a Diamond Fields Advertiser piece found on Newsbank re his promotion to the Knights franchise as starters.  100 FC/LA/T20 appearances represents decent amount of cricket notabilìty.  JP ( Talk ) 18:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Thank you for pointing this out.  While I don't think the first two sources contribute much (three-ish sentences of coverage and an interview), the third one is much more promising and an indication that there might more coverage out there to meet GNG.  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:14, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Spelling of his name differs between sources, but certainly WP:GNG passing coverage that JP has found.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 18:47, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Beyond what has been found, this should perhaps dictate logic should be used – if a cricketer makes this many appearances at the highest level, then they're probably notable.  AA ( talk ) 21:29, 30 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and mention in the article the dual version of his name's spelling.  I would say he passes WP:SIGCOV .  In addition to the sources already mentioned there is another source here: [4] .  Contributor892z ( talk ) 19:35, 4 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note that this is a WP:MIRROR .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 19:50, 4 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: keep
Table manners in North America: In fact it is about the History of table manners in North America and is heavily slanted towards the etiquette inherited from Europe.  It does not even (as far as I can tell) acknowledge that Other People Exist and that people in North America who do not share a European heritage have very different norms.  In terms of policy, I'm arguing that WP:NOTESSAY applies and that it is essentially impossible to write a page on this subject without a large dose of WP:OR and bias.  I accept sources exist.  I accept on that basis the topic is notable and noted.  But this page has not been substantially edited for many years, has displayed bias for many years and has asserted that something extremely complicated (ie eating norms within a highly multicultural society) are relatively simple (ie the norms inherited from Europe are the basis for etiquette for everyone there).  I can't see how this can be overcome.  JMWt ( talk ) 07:27, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions .  JMWt ( talk ) 07:27, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Just a quick keep and comment : the article does provide references, I think a review and perhaps pruning is in order, but not deletion.  I refer humbly to table manners for consideration and juxtaposition.  -- Ouro ( blah blah ) 10:41, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as the subject is clearly notable.  I'm sympathetic to the idea of addressing imbalance, but I can't see how we're ever going to end up with an article covering social norms of eating in a wide range of cultures if we simply delete the article because it's unbalanced.  That leaves no incentive for anyone ever to correct it.  And there is no deadline.  Elemimele ( talk ) 18:11, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The current state of the article is not a valid WP:DELREASON .  As said above, there is WP:NODEADLINE .  The article is reasonably sourced and can be salvaged with editing as an alternative to deletion .  Qwaiiplayer ( talk ) 18:24, 16 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The editor's talk page identifies them as a 2018  WikiEd Student Editor at Everett Community College.  This was the editor's one and only Wikipedia creation.   Given that, the subject matter was likely classroom-assigned, and makes more sense.  — Maile ( talk ) 04:07, 21 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:AFDNOTCLEANUP Lightburst ( talk ) 01:22, 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: keep
David Molina: Joeykai ( talk ) 03:59, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 15:23, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 15:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep A century of caps for one of the most successful teams in the Honduran top flight over an eight-year-old career makes him notable and significant, at least locally.  Here are two substantial sources: [12] and [13] .  Anwegmann ( talk ) 04:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Appears to be an important figure for F.C. Motagua , winning titles with them, there are probably more local sources for him.  But the article certainly isn't the best, needs a lot to be added too it.  Govvy ( talk ) 08:02, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – The article needs improvement, but it doesn't fail WP:GNG .  Svartner ( talk ) 03:01, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - He has international caps therefore he is undoubtedly notable.  IJA ( talk ) 10:39, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ IJA : That statement is not supported by our notability guidelines at Wikipedia:Notability (sports) .  Robby.is.on ( talk ) 11:30, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Fails WP:GNG and WP:SPORTCRIT .  If editors disagree, please ping me with two or three sources that you believe contributes to WP:GNG .  BilledMammal ( talk ) 11:24, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ BilledMammal : Anwegmann linked "two substantial sources".  Robby.is.on ( talk ) 11:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] He linked one source, as articles from the same media outlet are not independent of each other.  We need more than that to meet GNG.  JoelleJay ( talk ) 19:34, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] [14] is another brief profile.  Hameltion ( talk | contribs ) 03:45, 20 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I've expanded the article with the three sources that have been mentioned here plus a fourth one.  I think the article's okay now though it could be more detailed.  Robby.is.on ( talk ) 10:27, 20 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep .  I think the El Heraldo and Diez pieces are decent enough for GNG considering the subject.  BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 01:34, 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: keep
Hotel Timor: Insufficient independent significant coverage.  Uhooep ( talk ) 08:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture , Travel and tourism ,  and Asia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:14, 13 April 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!  06:30, 20 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 08:21, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Seems to be sufficient sourcing, this is particularly good.  It's got quite an interesting history with the role it played in a number of conflicts in East Timor, which has been covered in numerous sources.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 13:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The sourcing from AusLondonder convinced me that the hotel is notable for the history of East Timor.  The hotel is the location of flashpoints in the conflict such as reported in the Guardian 24 years ago.  It is also the location where the referendum results are being read .  I am quite convinced that the place itself is notable.  ✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 06:09, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I added additional sources, including the www.dn.pt article and the Guardian article, but never came back to ! vote.  This hotel is a character in the story of East Timor's independence, as supported by reliable sources.  Oblivy ( talk ) 11:05, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as it has enough sources and seems notable Me Da Wikipedian ( talk ) 12:24, 2 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: keep
Home Sweet Home (Dennis Robbins song): Redirecting this to Dennis Robbins may be a better alternative.  DreamRimmer ( talk ) 02:27, 6 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 07:33, 6 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Would at least be worth a merger rather than just a straight redirect.  The song is mentioned on Robbins' page, but the Billboard review isn't and the specific charting isn't in prose.  Although I did also find blurbs and charting in Cashbox ( [62] [63] [64] [65] [66] ) which could be enough to keep.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 10:54, 6 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Appears to pass WP:NSONG , as it spent 20 weeks on chart based on this link .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:35, 6 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep meets WP:NSONG .  The person who loves reading ( talk ) 15:11, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting, I'd like to see a few more opinions before closing this discussion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  03:21, 12 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Hey man im josh.  Meets WP:NSONG .  JML1148 ( talk | contribs ) 05:37, 12 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: keep
Uda Makuruppe: No reliable source.  Hongsy ( talk ) 02:50, 9 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Sri Lanka .  Hongsy ( talk ) 02:50, 9 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!  01:15, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment.  Described along with Palle Makuruppe as a village in A gazetteer of the Central Province of Ceylon .  Combined population given as over 200 in 1871, 1881 and  1891.  [24] .  Rupples ( talk ) 20:17, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Satisfied this was recognised in the 19th century censuses as a populated place.  Can be retained under WP:GEOLAND as notability is not temporary WP:NTEMP .  Mapping indicates residences thereabouts per OpenStreetMap and aerial views but boundaries of the settlement appear not to be strictly defined.   Acknowledge there's little to say, but this shouldn't mean wiping communities off Wikipedia (if I'm allowed to put it in such terms).  It may be preferable to place such settlements in list form within an an article covering the lowest administrative area with a redirect, but that's a separate decision and would probably require a policy change.  Rupples ( talk ) 03:28, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Added some detail.  Article could be retitled Makuruppe and Palle Makuruppe redirected here, given the gazetteer source has a combined entry and Makuruppe is the only name shown on OpenStreetMap.  Rupples ( talk ) 08:13, 19 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Makuruppe - satisfies WP:NGEO .  Dan arndt ( talk ) 05:45, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  So long as redirects are in place it benefits the encyclopedia by merging nearby settlements, when there seems not much chance of developing the individual articles beyond a short stub.  So in this case having Makuruppe as the article title with redirects from both Uda Makuruppe and Palle Makuruppe seems the way to go.  Rupples ( talk ) 09:50, 20 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: keep
Spoilage: I've transferred the most numerous entries to Spoiled .  Articles could easily be written (and should) about spoilage in business and of food in its place.  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 02:01, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , I have added a source at Tampering with evidence for Spoilage of evidence being used as an alternative name for this concept (which immediately came to mind when I saw the term, and was a surprising omission), and have added that to the disambiguation page.  BD2412 T 02:28, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:08, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I do not see what is wrong with this DAB page.  Bearian ( talk ) 01:12, 3 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: keep
DLIN: I can describe this as no indication of wp:notability under GNG or SNG but  in a search I found zero, so not even enought to confirm that this exists.  It's  not even mentioned at the Computational complexity theory article.   If it exists, the coverage here (a one sentence definition) could go in that article.  North8000 ( talk ) 18:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mathematics and Computing .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 19:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Usage in academic sources.  Entirely about DLIN: [17] [18] .  [19] [20] Mentions: [21] [22] A412 ( Talk • C ) 19:12, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the good sources found by A412.  -- {{u| Mark viking }} { Talk } 21:57, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the sources above, and in general its relevance to the P versus NP problem .  I have added references in the List of complexity classes and in P versus NP problem .  AmirOnWiki ( talk ) 08:32, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Searching for both the keywords DLIN and NLIN on Google Scholar finds some 170 hits, with the combination of keywords seeminingly eliminating many of the false positives that you would get from only one: most of the results are highly relevant.  These are a niche topic in structural complexity (because not robust classes) but notable enough.  Leaving the same comment on both AfDs.  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 16:49, 21 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Based on what folks have found that I didn't find.  North8000 ( talk ) 17:02, 21 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: keep
Ralph Bernstein: Engineer did engineering things.  UtherSRG (talk) 18:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Engineering , Germany ,  and United States of America .  UtherSRG (talk) 18:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , utterly ordinary career.  Also, the article was created by a banned sockpuppet, a paid editor.  — Biruitorul Talk 18:47, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - 100% agree MaskedSinger ( talk ) 08:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  In what universe is being elected a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) an "utterly ordinary career"?  The notability of researchers in industry as well as academia are covered by WP:NPROF which assesses notability by their impact on their field.  He meets criteria #3: The person has been an elected member of a highly selective and prestigious scholarly society or association (e.g., a National Academy of Sciences or the Royal Society ) or a fellow of a major scholarly society which reserves fellow status as a highly selective honor (e.g., Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers or Honorary Fellow of the Institute of Physics ).  StarryGrandma ( talk ) 05:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions .  StarryGrandma ( talk ) 05:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  IEEE Fellow is a clear pass of WP:PROF#C3 , one of the main examples used in WP:PROF of the sort of thing that passes that criterion.  G5 speedy is not in play because the article was created before anyone was indeffed (which is, by the way, not the same thing as banned).  And in what universe would, say, "professional athlete did professional athlete things" be regarded as a valid deletion rationale, or "100% agree" be regarded as a substantial contribution to a deletion discussion?  — David Eppstein ( talk ) 05:41, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  WP:Prof#C3 is passed.  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 06:22, 18 April 2024 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Keep : Clear C3 pass as an IEEE fellow.  Curbon7 ( talk ) 22:17, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : not only IEEE, but NASA medal, etc. would be enough even if he weren't an IEEE Fellow.   Basically a speedy or snow keep.   -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 00:45, 20 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: keep
Professor Hershel Layton: Meanwhile, others were just from game reviews with the same name, including the current sources used in the receptions section.  Unfortunately, we need more to pass WP:GNG threshold.  🥒 Greenish Pickle!  🥒 ( 🔔 ) 02:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements , Television ,  and Video games .  🥒 Greenish Pickle!  🥒 ( 🔔 ) 02:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I almost immediately found this source talking about Layton's name being an unusual one for a protagonist, the use of his name as a title (which they identified as a relative rarity in modern games), and how he differs from a typical protagonist.  This doesn't fulfill WP:THREE , but just from that quick search and the source provided, I strongly believe that any deeper search would come up with more.  - Cukie Gherkin ( talk ) 03:04, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  In addition to the Eurogamer article Greenish Picke! linked and the Siliconera article that Cukie Gherkin found, Tablet has an article, "The Summer's Hottest Video Game Is About a Scholar Named Hershel", that foregrounds coverage of the character over the video game, particularly how being named "Hershel" makes the character a distinctly Jewish gentleman .  " Three best sources " is an essay rather than a guideline or policy, but for what it's worth this demonstrates there are three solid sources for the character's notability.  Hydrangeans ( she/her | talk | edits ) 07:37, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - I believe the Eurogamer, Siliconera, and Tablet sources puts us at WP:THREE .  Could definite use a trim of the in-universe story appearances stuff, and an expansion of the reception with these sources, but overall that's clean up stuff.  Sergecross73 msg me 23:09, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : I believe the sources presented demonstrate notability.  Toughpigs ( talk ) 23:16, 24 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Withdraw .  I believed the 3 sources above should be enough.  🥒 Greenish Pickle!  🥒 ( 🔔 ) 23:21, 24 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: keep
Batman and Superman: Di (they-them) ( talk ) 19:45, 26 May 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 Comics and animation .  Di (they-them) ( talk ) 19:45, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep and tag as a set index.  This is functionally a directory of works that a reader might expect to find when searching for the title phrase.  Frankly, it is probably also possible to write a substantive and well-sourced article discussing the various scholarly juxtapositions of these characters as archetypes.  BD2412 T 20:15, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  It's useful as a disambiguation because there are a few titles that use similar formatting and it serves as a landing page for those titles.  Since a disambiguation page is necessary, it might as well be a full fledged set index to catch the rest of the works where the characters overlap.  Also, as BD mentions, an "actual encyclopedia article about the duo" should be encouraged here.  -- T avix ( talk ) 01:30, 27 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : necessary dab page (or possibly set index), though needs some reformatting.  Pam D 07:17, 27 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Disambiguate - Kazamzam ( talk ) 18:26, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Disambiguate per Kazamzam.  Shooterwalker ( talk ) 01:53, 2 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: keep