hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Paul Hale: Fails WP:MUSICBIO and WP:GNG .  Most (all?) of the references are about things he worked on as opposed to being about him (so are passing mentions and not WP:SIGCOV ).  - UtherSRG (talk) 16:11, 6 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Bands and musicians , Engineering ,  and United Kingdom .  UtherSRG (talk) 16:11, 6 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!  23:30, 13 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Looked at this, this morning and again just now.  I can't see how he is notable.  There is no real coverage on him.  I can't see how he can notable.  When a did a WP:BEFORE on him this morning, there was nothing of note.  Many of the reference of the article are dead links.  Fails WP:SIGCOV .  scope_creep Talk 10:03, 14 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
Maldives–Switzerland relations: The 4th is not indepth.  Not much interaction besides diplomatic recognition.  Fails GNG.  LibStar ( talk ) 10:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Maldives ,  and Switzerland .  LibStar ( talk ) 10:04, 5 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I think this kind of article is on the edge of what we'd accept for pretty much any minor village that has its own entry here.  It's factual, there are sources and, who knows, should something substantial happen then we'll have the backbone for the entry (a cursory search shows that there have been, in fact, discussions on these specific bilateral relations in the past).  Superboilles ( talk ) 17:50, 11 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  There's not much here; not enough for a stand-alone article.  The French-language news article noted above is not enough to constitute WP:SIGCOV of this topic.  Yilloslime ( talk ) 15:33, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Shadow311 ( talk ) 15:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Shadow311 ( talk ) 15:57, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails WP:GNG , WP:N and WP:SIGCOV .  BlakeIsHereStudios ( talk | contributions ) 18:23, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete NN.  Desertarun ( talk ) 19:18, 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: delete
Rune Sovndahl: The first, eleventh, and eighteenth sources are from beststartup.co.uk , a for-profit WP:SPONSORED website, which is certainly unreliable.  Fancy Refrigerator ( talk ) 11:23, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Businesspeople ,  and United Kingdom .  Fancy Refrigerator ( talk ) 11:23, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment This was deleted following WP:Articles for deletion/Rune Sovndahl (entrepreneur) , along with a speedy and two prods.  Its current incarnation was started at Rune Hoy Sovndahl , in what looks like a second attempt at flying under the radar of watchlists.   See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fantastic Services (2nd nomination) .  The creator of both articles has been indefinitely blocked for undisclosed paid editing, and this one is similarly promotional.  That said, I'm on the fence about notability at the moment, as it's got substantial profiles from the BBC and Money Week.  The Financial Times and Guardian sources are also substantial, but both are interviews so not secondary sources.  Uncle Spock ( talk ) 11:48, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Looks like the subject inherits notability from his company Fantastic Services.  Much of the sources focus on his company and not the man himself.  Fancy Refrigerator ( talk ) 12:22, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Blatant promotion of a non-notable businessman.  May need salting.  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 13:24, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and salt : Fails GNG, repeatedly deleted and recreated, main editor ( MediaWatch ) blocked for WP:UPE .  Flip Format ( talk ) 13:34, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and salt, not notable and keeps coming back.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 14:41, 26 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete + Salt - Completely fails GNG, and yet repeatedly recreated.  Also seems to have a veiled promotional angle towards his company as well.  -- TheInsatiableOne ( talk ) 08:20, 27 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
Rakhee Gupta: Also, the individual clearly does not meet the criteria outlined in WP:GNG and WP:BIO .  Charlie ( talk ) 18:02, 4 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India .  Charlie ( talk ) 18:02, 4 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women and Uttar Pradesh .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:22, 4 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep The article doesn't seem to mention it, but she's posted on YouTube, so there was some attention over that.  Sources 4 and 6 (mostly 4, 6 looks like a press release).  Rest are semi-helpful.  Seems more notable for the Youtube post than the routine job she has.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:42, 4 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete what about notablity ?  fails in wp:gng wp:bio . ... IAS just a job not a criteria Worldiswide ( talk ) 03:12, 9 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk ) 18:47, 11 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
Six Points, Clay County, Indiana: There's nothing much there, and I wasn't able to find anything myself.  Mangoe ( talk ) 20:11, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana .  Shellwood ( talk ) 20:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - No evidence of a notable community at this location.  – dlthewave ☎ 03:35, 24 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Its clear this is a nonotable intersection.  James.folsom ( talk ) 02:44, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Toxic (2025 film): References are of an announcement for the film (about five days ago) so this is likely WP:TOOSOON .  I would redirect to Yash but the notability tag was removed so I am assuming the redirect would be objected to as well so letting users decide at AfD.  CNMall41 ( talk ) 22:33, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Film and India .  CNMall41 ( talk ) 22:34, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:NFF .  There's no mention of the film at Yash (actor) .  Esolo5002 ( talk ) 23:27, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect .  I do understand that principal photography has not started yet and it will begin soon.  It can be redirected to Yash (actor) or Geetu Mohandas .  Manthara talk 02:35, 14 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per WP:NFF , filming hasn't begun.  Kailash29792 (talk) 02:06, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : It has only just been announced and there are no reports that filming has begun.  Draftifying might be acceptable, but note that there is a (poor) draft of this same subject at Draft:Toxic (film) .  Definitely do not redirect to Yash (actor) .  Also delete the redirect at TOXIC (film) .   — Archer ( t · c ) 04:11, 15 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Can I move the existing page Toxic (2025 film) to Draft:Toxic (film) ?  — Manthara talk 09:13, 16 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Campfire Legends: Metacritic has zero reviews, critical or user, for any of the three games denoted here.  WP:VG/S search comes up with nothing but database entries, with one exception: GameZebo.  GameZebo has reviews and walkthroughs for each of the three games, yet no other publications seem to have a whisper about it.  GameZebo also ran a promotion for their forums to give away free copies of the game.  That means each individual game has exactly 1 source of in-depth significant coverage from our vetted reliable sources.  -- ferret ( talk ) 00:28, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  -- ferret ( talk ) 00:28, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Adventure Gamers [36] is genre specific, but a RS, per here [37] Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:35, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Oaktree b That's a database entry. There's no review or coverage there, just a boilerplate plot summary. -- ferret ( talk ) 00:36, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Correction, there is review buried in this big compilation article , but that's still 1 review/publication for two of the games, and 2 reviews for the third game.  -- ferret ( talk ) 00:38, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Here's Gamezebo, which is RS [38] . Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:50, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Yes, I explicitly mentioned GameZebo in my nomination statement. -- ferret ( talk ) 00:58, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete One, or even 2 reviews for each game is not enough to satisfy GNG, and only one of the games has 2 reviews.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 03:00, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete A usual yardstick of notability is for a game to have review coverage from three different independent reliable sources under WP:VG/S .  This game has two.  That the page is really combining three titles into one is suggestive that there is not enough coverage to establish notability.  ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk ) 00:18, 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
Henry Beak: He doesn't seem to have done anything of note.  Grahame ( talk ) 07:51, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions .  Grahame ( talk ) 07:54, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions .  Grahame ( talk ) 08:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Nothing in google news or google books.  Fails WP:BIO .  LibStar ( talk ) 06:59, 17 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: delete
Thomas Lorenz: Page created ten years ago by a now blocked sock.  No evidence of any notability whatsoever.  CycloneYoris talk!  08:18, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists , Austria ,  and France .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 13:21, 15 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: delete
Monsterland and Monster Island: The article is currently very poorly sourced, and the situation doesn't seem like it can improve.  Not sure on an ATD to this, given it's a very general location, and not really discussed on the series page.  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 23:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Film .  Pokelego999 ( talk ) 23:44, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or redirect .  99% unreferenced WP:FANCRUFT with no indication of passing WP:GNG .  -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 02:51, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions .  Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 02:51, 26 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - The current article is basically entirely unsourced, and I am not finding reliable sources for either Monsterland or Monster Island outside of plot summaries of the movies they appeared in.  I don't think a redirect would work in this case because not only is there no actual clear target to redirect to, but this would also make a terrible and very implausible search term.  Even if someone can recommend a proper target to redirect to, I would still advocate deleting this, and instead having two separate redirect pages, one for "Monsterland" and one for "Monster Island".  Rorshacma ( talk ) 04:48, 28 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
Jean-Philippe Aumasson: Amigao ( talk ) 20:16, 6 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Cryptocurrency , Mathematics , Computing ,  and France .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 12:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 12:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Far from my area but notability should be examined under WP:PROF; this appears to be his GS profile [1] with top citations 418,360,357,276,244 and a further two papers over 200 citations and a total of ten papers over 100 citns.  There's a fairly low total number of papers though and his PhD only dates from 2009.  Espresso Addict ( talk ) 13:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions .  Espresso Addict ( talk ) 13:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Natg 19 ( talk ) 16:51, 13 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!  23:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Soft delete (treat like expired PROD).   Cannot find enough evidence that this passes WP:PROF, but far enough outside my main areas of expertise to have a good sense of what passes or doesn't in this field.   Only weighing in since this has two relistings and needs some direction.  -- Michael Scott Asato Cuthbert (talk) 21:33, 22 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
Sonia Jackson Myles: WP:NOT and TOU violations.  duffbeerforme ( talk ) 12:38, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions .  CptViraj ( talk ) 12:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  CptViraj ( talk ) 12:56, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete professional profile , WP:NOTLINKEDIN — siro χ o 15:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : PR pieces, this Forbes Contributor piece [22] and the Blomberg interview used in the article, none of which are RS, show this isn't notable.  I can't find non-PR sources.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 18:13, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Management and Florida .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 20:31, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
CLACL: ~ T P W 14:58, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Yeah, there's like no results at all from a web search.  For a programming project, there's no way for this to pass GNG if there's no mention of it anywhere on the web.  0x Deadbeef →∞ ( talk to me ) 15:10, 25 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - probably has WP:ORIG and WP:COI issues, no support for notability.  - Indefensible ( talk ) 19:00, 25 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: delete
Sports broadcasting contracts in Poland: The subjects are not described as a group, failing WP:LISTN .  Also, sources are primary sources, nothing but news announcements and none of those assert notability.  Those arguing for a keep claiming how useful it is, shall be advised to refer to WP:USEFUL .  I also advise Fandom for them if they want to save it so much.  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 08:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , Sports , Lists ,  and Poland .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 08:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  While I agree this is problematic, I think we need a mass nomination and discussion for all entries in Category:Sports broadcasting contracts by country (due to, well, what is a Sports broadcasting contract - it is a red link here, so why do we need lists of a concept we have not even defined yet or shown it is notable?).   -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 08:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] For the record, the nominator attempted that and was told that there were simply too many articles for one deletion discussion.  I tend to think that it's better to try each of these list articles on their own merits.  Esolo5002 ( talk ) 23:07, 9 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Esolo5002 Fair enough.  No merit I see here - it fails WP:GNG or WP:NLIST .  In other words, it is non-notable WP:OR .  ' Delete . Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | reply here 01:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L iz Read! Talk! 06:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - No merit under WP:NLIST BrigadierG ( talk ) 10:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Wikipedia isn't a TV guide. This fails to meet the WP:LISTN criteria. Let'srun ( talk ) 14:46, 19 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: delete
Nurul Maulidi: The best sources found were JPNN , Republika and Detik none of which are even close to showing significant coverage of Nurul Maulidi.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Indonesia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:33, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:52, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 14:23, 21 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per all above.  Anwegmann ( talk ) 00:44, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I'm also unable to find WP:SIGCOV .  WC gudang inspirasi ( talk ) 04:18, 23 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: delete