hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Palle Talawinna Udagammedda: 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 ] Comment .  Well, it certainly has a railway station, which suggests it exists and probably passes WP:GEOLAND .  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 13:23, 14 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] delete Katugastota has a railway station, if GMaps is to trusted.  There's no source given for the location, it's the usual useless reference to the Sri Lankan census, and if the location be believed, it's a neighborhood in Kandy, not a village.  Mangoe ( talk ) 13:11, 15 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!  01:16, 16 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Palletalawinna is a settlement with a railway station of the same name.  The settlement is not a suburb of Kandy per Google Maps.  However, the article title includes Udagammedda and the only reference I've found under the article title is the GNIS.  Rupples ( talk ) 04:19, 18 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Palletalawinna , which is a notable geographic location.  Additional references provided to clarify Palletalawinna passess WP:NGEO .  Dan arndt ( talk ) 03:00, 20 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Dan arndt , there is no Palletalawinna article.  L iz Read!  Talk!  07:12, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Liz : I meant it should be renamed to Palletalawinna, as that is the WP:COMMONAME for the location.  Dan arndt ( talk ) 07:50, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] To muddy the waters further, there's Palle Talawinna .  Rupples ( talk ) 08:07, 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!  01:04, 23 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 ) 10:50, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment @ Liz : / @ Rupples : have created Palletalawinna so that a redirect is now able to be achieved.  Dan arndt ( talk ) 04:08, 5 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I support this redirect.  Rupples ( talk ) 21:02, 5 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: redirect
List of extinct reptiles in the wild: Inferior, unsourced article with errors (e.g. why is Erythrolamprus ornatus included?) and commentary which topic-wise duplicates the existing article List of recently extinct reptiles .  Fram ( talk ) 19:43, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Biology and Lists .  Fram ( talk ) 19:43, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Animal-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 19:51, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List_of_animals_that_are_extinct_in_the_wild#Reptiles , unclear if anything should be merged.  Reywas92 Talk 20:02, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge Redirect , I checked and only two species of reptile are classified as EW .  The rest was unreferenced, and a list with only two species doesn't justify inclusion, especially since List of animals that are extinct in the wild is right there for the merge redirect, as the content is already there.  Chaotic Enby ( talk ) 20:04, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect or delete.  Mccapra ( talk ) 21:58, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List_of_animals_that_are_extinct_in_the_wild#Reptiles : the content of the article is already covered on other pages (for example List of recently extinct reptiles ).  Because there is a suitable target redirecting is a reasonable WP:ATD .  InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs ) 15:56, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect main list is small enough that it doesn't need this tiny offshoot.  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 20:57, 30 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List_of_animals_that_are_extinct_in_the_wild#Reptiles , unneeded ListFORK that duplicates content in existing article.  // Timothy :: talk 14:03, 1 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List_of_animals_that_are_extinct_in_the_wild#Reptiles .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 00:35, 2 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: redirect
The Sheffield Tower: Seems like a non-notable building in Dubai, I don't see any coverage that would meet the GNG.  JMWt ( talk ) 06:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and United Arab Emirates .  JMWt ( talk ) 06:23, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  There only seems to be trivial mention of the subject.  Lack enough in-depth coverage to pass WP:GNG .  Tutwakhamoe ( talk ) 21:32, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect , or Merge or simply Keep.   It is an item in List of tallest buildings in Dubai , linked on its page, so there should at least be a redirect, preserving the page history in case of more development and sources.   Call it "Merge" if this has any information not there.   This AFD should not have been proposed; AFD is for actual deletions and clearly that is not appropriate.  wp:MERGE proposal would have been okay.  --Doncram ( talk , contribs ) 18:37, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply  ] 1. Being in a WP list doesn't make it notable  2. The relevant standard is the WP:GNG , which you need to address if you have valid reasons to vote ! keep  3. You've not supplied anything to show why a merge or redirect is relevant.  JMWt ( talk ) 06:32, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  01:30, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] To respond to User:JMWt, with the basics of what a redirect is:  a redirect, at least makes sense, to provide information to readers looking for the topic.   The list-article row directly provides information, in context (and sometimes/often it is more informative for coverage of a topic to be within a list-article, as relative matters, context gives more than what a short individual stub can provide.   A redirect clarifies that Wikipedia does not have an article on the topic under any name variation.   The use of redirect provides edit history and enables restoration and expansion in the future if coverage/sources warrant, with adherence to the promise of Wikipedia that editors' writing will be credited to them.   These are basics of Wikipedia.   If you don't understand, perhaps your asking questions at wp:TEAHOUSE would help you.  --Doncram ( talk , contribs ) 12:58, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't need the personal attacks thanks.  It is a fact, not an opinion, that in AfD debates you need to address the GNG.  Just repeating that WP:ILIKEIT is not much of a contribution to the debate.  JMWt ( talk ) 14:56, 20 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Yet another non-notable unbuilt building.  Oppose redirecting since these never-built projects IMO shouldn't even be listed there.  * Pppery * it has begun... 23:31, 25 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: redirect
Om Gan Ganapataye Namo Namah: Unable to find WP:GNG -level sources.  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 05:29, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I am also nominating the following related page for the same reason: Aarti Kunj Bihari Ki ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 05:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs , Hinduism ,  and India .  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 05:31, 28 July 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!  05:27, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Delete Article clearly fails WP:GNG and may be a case of WP:SYNTH.  IncompA 08:44, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  There are several hits for Aarti Kunj Bihari Ki using Google Books at https://www.google.com/search? tbs=bks:1&q=%22Aarti+Kunj+Bihari+Ki%22+-wikipedia I cannot tell whether these represent criticism or discussion of he song or just a reprint of its lyrics.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 09:50, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And this Gopinathan, Prashant (2023-06-22).  Elementales .  Blue Rose Publishers.  seems to be quoting the lyrics like a prayer in a novel.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 10:05, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] If the prayer came before the song, perhaps the article should be about the prayer, if references can be found.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 10:07, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Ganesha .  This is a traditional mantra of Ganesha, perhaps performed by the artist, but not written by them.  Skyerise ( talk ) 16:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, CycloneYoris talk!  19:26, 11 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: redirect
Student Union Building (IUPUI Campus): Assertions of historical significance that might contribute to WP:NBUILDING are sourced to a student newspaper, which per WP:RSSM cannot contribute to notability.  Triptothecottage ( talk ) 00:43, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education and Indiana .  Triptothecottage ( talk ) 00:43, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: per nom, though I'm not opposed to a redirect to Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis .  HyperAccelerated ( talk ) 00:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions .  Necrothesp ( talk ) 12:25, 25 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: redirect
Dinner with Racers: scope_creep Talk 23:46, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and Motorsport .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 23:51, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete The Road and Track article is a solid source, I can only find [1] in Car and Driver, but it's not more than a mention.  As it stands now, the article is largely a list of episodes.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:54, 30 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Redirect to Ryan_Eversley#Dinner_with_Racers_podcast (I'm changing my !vote to redirect because it's a viable ATD).  does not pass WP:N and violates quite a few other guidelines.  The few sources are either not independent or not reliable.  TipsyElephant ( talk ) 23:54, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect / merge to Ryan Eversley as a viable WP:ATD until N issues can be addressed.  ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 23:16, 6 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: redirect
Nao Kawakita: Her name comes up in articles about Maximum the Hormone but only in passing, and certain search terms bring up more results for the fluffy mascot who took her place one time a few years ago than for her.  Unless she's getting more coverage in Japanese media that I don't have access to, I think this page should be redirected to the band's.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 05:39, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Update: Per PerfectSoundWhatever's mentioning of them below, I went and looked at the articles for the band's other three members and have determined that they run into the same issues as Kawakita's, so I have expanded this AfD to include them as well.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 23:14, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians , Women ,  and Japan .  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 05:39, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Copying MichaylaGussler 's from the talk page they just posted it on: Nao Kawakita is relevant, but the sources aren't haven't been provided.  Therefore, I feel that as long as more information is added to the article, the article should stay.  Most of the sources and relevant news stories about her are in Japanese, and probably haven't been added as they are less likely to appear in English search results.  I did also see, however, that even a simple English-based search on news about Nao Kawakita that there were articles about her involvement with the city of Kuroishi City, Aomori-ken in the north where farming is common.  According to the articles, including this one by Vice, Nao Kawakita has been performing under the name Nyango Star, a cat-apple hybrid mascot (known as yuru-chara in Japanese) who is working to fight the decline in agriculture in Japan by performing songs and getting children excited about farming and food.  I would say that is at least one example of a few other articles she could be linked to.  And there's not to mention, much of Maximum the Hormone's history and influence on Japanese Nu Metal culture isn't detailed or linked to as well.  MichaylaGussler ( talk ) 11:18, 21 April 2023 (UTC) From now on, please leave your comments on this discussion page where they're meant to go.  And if you have access to those Japanese sources you mention then please provide them here.  I couldn't even find coverage that identified Kawakita as Nyango Star so if such a piece exists, it would be very helpful.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 11:39, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It is also worth noting that jp:川北奈緒 is a redirect to the band's page where there is a section on Nao but without a huge amount of promising coverage, and most of what is there revolves around her marriage and pregnancy which is the same fancruft which was

Discussion outcome: redirect
Tell Me It's Over (Frida song): Previous editors created a redirect to the album, and it was recreated earlier this month without reliable citations to verify notability.  I cannot find sources to overrule the previous deletion.  Significa liberdade ( talk ) 04:31, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:27, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:27, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Something's Going On : found no additional coverage or signs of notability.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 07:49, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Tell Me It’s Over is a Frida single.  I would argue that it is notable.  It has been released in Japan and is popular with fans and critics.  Why should it be deleted?  There are also sources and clippings relating to the song.  DalexB ( talk ) 10:04, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ DalexB care to link those sources and clippings you say exist?  Because that's the one thing that would define notability here.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 13:34, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The sources are in the references.  DalexB ( talk ) 17:24, 11 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!  04:13, 17 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect , fails WP:NSONG .  Probably needs cleanup as the article reads that the single did not chart but some other song titled “I Know There’s Something Going On” did and there's a cite for that, why is this song getting credit another song's charts/success?
 What is actually going on under the release section , is it for this particular song or for an album?  ihateneo ( talk ) 19:01, 18 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: redirect
The Albatross Guest House: Fails WP:NALBUM I can't find anything in the way of non-trivial coverage.  That's not to say sources don't exist, but in any case per WP:NALBUM : Notability aside, a standalone article is only appropriate when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged into the artist's article or discography Polyamorph ( talk ) 10:13, 24 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music .  Polyamorph ( talk ) 10:13, 24 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!  07:07, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Bright (American band) as has already been done at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bells Break Their Towers .  This could have been done boldly for all of the band's albums with little controversy and no need for this lengthy process.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 14:05, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I agree, but note I brought these albums to AfD after your suggestion here .  Polyamorph ( talk ) 16:55, 1 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
WNGA-LP: Lacking any secondary sources at all.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 14:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio , Organizations ,  and Georgia (U.S. state) .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 14:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of radio stations in Georgia (U.S. state) : It's considerably harder, or at least rarer, for a newer LPFM (or really most newer radio stations) to attain the requisite significant coverage to meet the GNG (much less ORGCRIT, which mainly differs in a stronger enforcement of source quality).  An {{ R to list entry }} as an alternative to deletion is probably the best we can do.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 14:58, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
Government Ayurvedic College, Guwahati: Twinkle1990 ( talk ) 16:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science , Medicine , India ,  and Assam .  Twinkle1990 ( talk ) 16:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep There are plenty of reliable sources and qualifies for WP:GNG .  It have both WP: PRIMARY and WP: SECONDARY sources mentioned as references.  It also has historical importance as it is first and only Ayurvedic College in North East India region.  - AjayDas ( talk ) 08:30, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I was also not in favor to delete it.  But I couldn't find sufficient references to establish the WP:GNG .  If you can demonstrate the notability with sourcing, please do it.  Otherwise, just a! vote and " it is first and only Ayurvedic College in North East India region." is not helping it anyhow.  Twinkle1990 ( talk ) 14:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  This page has poor sources and it does not satisfy the notability guidelines for organizations.  Fails WP:NSCHOOL .  RangersRus ( talk ) 14:29, 17 May 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!  22:37, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Srimanta Sankaradeva University of Health Sciences to which it is affiliated.  Founded in 1948 it is 75 years atleast clearly a search term.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 20:25, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : As per my check, I found nothing that can be called in-depth coverage.  The subject fails to meet WP:GNG and WP:NSCHOOL .  It requires in-depth coverage from multiple independent reliable sources to establish notability.  Grab Up - Talk 08:47, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Keep?  Delete?  Or Redirect?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  22:56, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect
Solar eclipse of April 11, 2108: Q 𝟤 𝟪 13:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Astronomy-related deletion discussions .  Q 𝟤 𝟪 13:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : WP:CRYSTAL .  Predicted solar eclipses are already listed at List_of_solar_eclipses_in_the_22nd_century .  Per WP:FUTUREEVENT , future events follow normal notability guidelines, and therefore is not notable.  Ap m h 14:24, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of solar eclipses in the 22nd century just like we do for every other "future" eclipse that goes this route.  Primefac ( talk ) 06:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of solar eclipses in the 22nd century per Primefac and this RfC : general consensus is that future eclipses that do not meet WP:GNG / WP:NASTRO should be redirected.  InterstellarGamer12321 ( talk | contribs ) 18:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to List of solar eclipses in the 22nd century .  Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:43, 4 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: redirect