hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Capital Express Route: It wasn't even the first international route into either Canberra or Wellington, although it received some media attention at its launch, its not really any more notable than any other new airline route.  A stand alone article is not required per Wikipedia:NOTCATALOG , WP:MILL , as the content is already covered in sufficient detail in the articles for Canberra and Wellington airports Dfadden ( talk ) 05:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:32, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:32, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 08:32, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Australia and New Zealand .  – robertsky ( talk ) 08:41, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  As noted, this is covered in the articles on the airports and doesn't really justify a standalone article.  Nick-D ( talk ) 09:50, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete we generally don't create articles for individual air routes.  Especially for ones that only lasted 2 years.  LibStar ( talk ) 10:36, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per the excellent rationale from the nominator.  This is already covered in the airport articles and wasn't notable in the first place.  Nomader ( talk ) 17:07, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as this does not need a stand alone article and it is sufficiently covered in the Wellington Airport article NealeWellington ( talk ) 08:25, 16 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Air routes are most often non-notable.  Specifics of historic destinations are discussed on airport and airline articles.  Ajf773 ( talk ) 19:05, 18 April 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
KLPS-LP: Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 04:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and California .  Mvcg66b3r ( talk ) 04:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Subject does not have the WP:SIGCOV needed to meet the WP:GNG .  The only sources in the article are FCC notifications.  Let'srun ( talk ) 03:26, 16 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: delete
Royal (Indian magazine): This article is without sources since long and I didn't found any coverage during WP:BEFORE .  ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri ( ✍️ ) 00:09, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: News media , Fashion ,  and India .  ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri ( ✍️ ) 00:09, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Apparently fails GNG; I was also unable to find coverage of any sort in reliable sources.  Article was created by two SPAs and has seen little activity since.  — SamX [ talk · contribs ] 07:00, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Not that notable-- Tumbuka Arch ★ ★ ★ 12:20, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails WP:GNG .  𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜 15:37, 21 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Why is it, that this article only just got nominated for deletion right when I started making edits related to it, can someone explain that to me?  Is that a double standard?  Also, the publication has interviewed big name real estate developers.  Is that notable?  Pladero ( talk ) 07:03, 23 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hi @ Pladero , interviewing notable figures doesn't make it notable.  It needs to pass WP:GNG with WP:SIGCOV .  And there is no double standard issue with you.  The reviewer, whenever they review any article and find that the article is not following notability guidelines, will add the deletion tag, especially when there are no citations available.  This is a review process and is not personal to any editor.  Thank you.  ❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri ( ✍️ ) 07:17, 23 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: delete
Jo Kwang: Simione001 ( talk ) 02:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 02:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 02:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions .  Simione001 ( talk ) 02:03, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong Delete – With only database source listed, this article is absolutely unacceptable!  ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:04, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete —Clearly fails  without enough international experience to make up for it.  Anwegmann ( talk ) 22:11, 31 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 16:33, 1 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 16:35, 1 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I am unable to find anything approaching WP:SIGCOV .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 21:02, 5 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
Cheekha: As always, every film is not automatically entitled to a Wikipedia article just because it exists -- films have to pass notability markers, such as notable film awards and/or the reception of enough reliable source coverage about the film to pass WP:GNG . But the referencing here consists of two directory entries that aren't support for notability at all, and glancing namechecks of the film's existence in coverage of its lead actor as a person, with no sources shown that are actually about the film -- and fundamentally, the notability claim is that the film exists, which isn't "inherently" notable enough to exempt the sourcing from having to be better than it is.  Bearcat ( talk ) 13:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India .  Bearcat ( talk ) 13:16, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] rather Keep .  There are probably sources in Hindi.  The sources on the page are indeed only half-focusing on the film (some less than half, true) but still, reading them makes you think it's mildly notable. — MY, OH, MY !  22:22, 7 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] We don't keep badly sourced articles just because somebody speculates that better sources might exist — anybody can claim that better sources might exist for anything , even hoaxes.  So we only keep poorly sourced articles if better sources are proven to exist, and idly speculating about the possibility of maybe finding better sources than have actually been shown doesn't count for much.  Bearcat ( talk ) 01:49, 9 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:01, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Arbitrarily0 ( talk ) 07:27, 22 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete appears to fail the general notability guideline .  It would be reasonable to keep it if it passed the additional criteria in WP:NFILM on the presumption that the required sources are likely to exist in Hindi, but we don't have any evidence that it does.  I'm not sure the film actually got a wide release given that the sources are largely talking about the premiere at a film festival, if it didn't then there aren't likely to be many reviews.  Hut 8.5 17:04, 31 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
Mandaue's Administration: No references and not notable.  HueMan1 ( talk ) 07:48, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics ,  and Philippines .  HueMan1 ( talk ) 07:48, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  -- TheLonelyPather ( talk ) 09:20, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no sources makes a merge out of the question. It's time to start stacking up the WP:TNT . BrigadierG ( talk ) 11:21, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Delete : Nonsense article with zero sources. Macktheknifeau ( talk ) 18:21, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as confusing. I don't think there's any info here that can be merged back to Mandaue . -- Lenticel ( talk ) 09:23, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete.  Redundant.  There are articles already for subject article's contents: mainly for the history of Mandaue local government (partial) and the list of its town/city heads . — Raider000 ( talk ) 05:53, 30 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
Nduka Anyanwu: A mention at List of association football players who died during their careers should suffice.  Geschichte ( talk ) 14:29, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football , Nigeria ,  and Germany .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 15:22, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comments He played for Dynamo Dresden, although it's ups and downs it is still a fair size club.  I wouldn't call this a one event player.  Have you done a solid WP:BEFORE ??  I didn't see if there was a German wiki article for the player.  But there is enough out there to improve the article.  Govvy ( talk ) 16:19, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] But there is enough out there to improve the article Where?  The only articles I could find were about the player's death.  Robby.is.on ( talk ) 17:12, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:04, 7 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:39, 8 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:39, 14 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Per nominator and GiantSnowman.  DarkHorseMayhem ( talk ) 22:13, 16 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Existentialist anarchism: None of the cited sources ever appeared to describe an "existentialist anarchism", nor does it appear this term has significant coverage in reliable sources .  Google Scholar only turns up 13 hits, none of which go into the term in any real depth.  [9] Only three of these sources predate the article, and none use it as anything more than a throwaway term.  The only source that appears to go into it in any depth (Wahl 2018) explicitly mentions that he is attempting to develop it into a "philosophy of the future", declaring it to be "all-too-neglected" by both present-day philosophers and anarchists.  I don't see anything in these sources that would bring the article to a length much longer than a stub.  Given that this article appears to fail to meet our general notability guidelines , I propose it be deleted.  There's nothing in the text that's really salvageable, and the only redirect locations I can think of are only tangentially related.  Grnrchst ( talk ) 16:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy and Politics .  Grnrchst ( talk ) 16:04, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - I agree with the nom that the page reads like an essay and there do not seem to be many sources which describe the idea in depth.  The other sources whch use the term (or "anarco-existentialism") appear to be using it in different ways so it is difficult to use them to write a sourced coherent page.  JMWt ( talk ) 06:30, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  In an earlier discussion on the article talk page I suggested it might be notable, but I'm convinced otherwise by Grnrchst's evidence.  Maybe worth writing up a little bit about the Wahl article on Existentialism ?  -- asilvering ( talk ) 02:33, 17 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per the talk page discussion: unclear scope, only loose affiliation between existentialism and anarchism in available sources, potential citogenesis fluffing this concept this concept beyond its actual influence, article written as an essay, insufficient coverage for a dedicated article and no good candidates for merge targets. czar 12:36, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete -- There is nothing worthwhile here to Redir or Merge.  Fails WP:GNG completely for lack of clear reference in WP:RS .  Generously, I'd call it WP:SYNTH ; more likely WP:OR and WP:NOTESSAY .  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 20:39, 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: delete
Black Carl: This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years ; I hope we can now resolve it.  Boleyn ( talk ) 20:00, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:22, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:22, 17 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!  23:16, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - the story of the name is cool, but the article has no evidence of notability except for one regional newspaper.  Llajwa ( talk ) 17:11, 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: delete
Orideetse Thela: is what WP:SPORTBASIC states and I see no evidence that Thela meets this minimum requirement.  Le Mauricien has a trivial mention of Thela, as does Le Défi and Le Mauricien 2 but trivial mentions are the exact opposite of significant coverage (see also WP:SIGCOV ).  He also seems to fall short of the recently revised WP:NBAD .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:39, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Badminton ,  and Botswana .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:40, 11 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per nominator.  DarkHorseMayhem ( talk ) 23:28, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:NBADMINTON .  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 08:13, 18 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Christine Brady: WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 23:13, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  She meets the WP:BIO but does not meet WP:GNG .  Micheal Kaluba ( talk ) 11:49, 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: delete
Professional Doctor of Diplomacy: Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 19:06, 23 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions .  Allan Nonymous ( talk ) 19:06, 23 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I came across this problem the other day and added a PROD tag to Diplomatic Academy of London .  This article was clearly created as spam by a single-purpose account, and it's disappointing it was moved to mainspace by an AfC reviewer in this state .  We have effectively perpetuated a nonsense and given credence to a fraudulent institution for over 15 years.  Searching "Professional Doctor of Diplomacy" returns nothing other than Wikipedia, Wikipedia mirrors, and Facebook.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 20:18, 23 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Agreed, no coverage, non-notable and possibly non-existent qual.  Tacyarg ( talk ) 10:05, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : doesn't look notable even if it exists.  Tehonk ( talk ) 05:12, 27 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: delete
Yellowknife Curling Centre: Not a notable topic.  – Aidan721 ( talk ) 17:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports and Canada .  – Aidan721 ( talk ) 17:14, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I believe the club is notable in my opinion, as it has sent  countless teams to Canada's national curling championships ( the Brier and Scotties Tournament of Hearts ), which have been generally considered the top level of play in the sport of curling.  -- Earl Andrew - talk 18:34, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Earl Andrew , it might help if you link to the specific SNG you're citing.  Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 01:34, 24 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, - 🔥 𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌) 🔥 00:05, 6 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete And maybe a weak one as it's not impossible to be notable with some articles like [29] but I can't figure out how to get it over the line.  If anyone does, the closer should ignore my vote.  SportingFlyer T · C 15:51, 6 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG .  The person who loves reading ( talk ) 15:16, 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!  02:14, 12 June 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!  00:50, 19 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Routine coverage in gnews.  No WP:SIGCOV that would meet WP:ORG .  LibStar ( talk ) 01:24, 19 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Nothing but WP:ROUTINE coverage, fails WP:GNG and WP:ORG .  JML1148 ( talk | contribs ) 07:21, 19 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Leonel López Cortez: Article is basically just a résumé .  BlameRuiner ( talk ) 07:16, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and California .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:16, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:28, 28 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 09:33, 28 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
Fred Meyers (businessman): Doesn't pass WP:GNG or WP:BIO .
 Can't find any notable works other than founding his company which barely passes WP:ORG .
 I recently AfD'd his company's article as well.  𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 07:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions .  𝓡𝔂𝓭𝓮𝔁 07:46, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment Fred Meyers is also an American retired actor and paramedic while Fred Meyer is a company.  I'm having trouble separating them out — Iadmc ♫ talk 08:04, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete any search has nothing about this guy and plenty about others of the same name: [27] [28] [29] etc.  The article does nothing to establish notability — Iadmc ♫ talk 08:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Fashion , Connecticut , New York ,  and North Carolina .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 11 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