hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
List of European League of Football broadcasters: All the sources are WP:PRIMARY , otherwise too overreliant on a single primary source.  Not a single reliable third party source.  Fails WP:LISTN .  In short, WP:NOTDIRECTORY .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 09:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television , American football ,  and Europe .  SpacedFarmer ( talk ) 09:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:50, 23 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This is a grouping not discussed in secondary sources.  Fails WP:LISTN .  Let'srun ( talk ) 21:34, 29 February 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
Mathew Agama: Football Ghana mentions the club he plays for, his position and has a quote from him with no independent analysis.  Ghana Sports Page has a tiny bit of analysis and has one additional piece of info compared to the previous source, that he joined the club last season.  The quote from the player is the same as in the previous article and is just pre-match hype rather than anything to build a biography from.  Aside from that, the coverage I can find is just trivial stuff like Modern Ghana so I'm not seeing any clear reason why this person needs an article.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:29, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Ghana .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:30, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:50, 25 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 20:29, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Article fails WP:GNG .  Jogurney ( talk ) 12:39, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Ibrahim El Moallem: Boleyn ( talk ) 14:45, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Egypt .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:07, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No significant coverage from reliable sources.  The first pop-up on my search were this which started convincing me but later created doubt as I could not find anymore sources, especially from independent of the subject than just press releases.  -- Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 18:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment the Arabic article contains a lot more material which probably amounts to a claim of notability, but none of it is sourced.  Mccapra ( talk ) 19:06, 14 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
Sani Umar Rijiyar Lemo: The original draft is a translation from https://www.alummarhausa.com.ng/2020/07/tarihin-sheik-dr-muhammad-sani-umar-rijiyar-lemu.html The sources do not seem reliable and talk about him in a promotional manner.  My before search was difficult, but I didn't find anything that stood out as the kind of coverage that would meet WP:GNG or WP:NPROF .  I can't tell whether his writings might make him notable.  I'd welcome input from people with expertise in Islamic studies.  Curb Safe Charmer ( talk ) 12:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Islam , Nigeria ,  and Saudi Arabia .  Curb Safe Charmer ( talk ) 12:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep Keep — Recipients of the Order of the Niger meet WP:ANYBIO#1 .  The subject of this article received the award .  Shoerack ( talk ) 17:28, 5 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I had considered that, but like any country's honours, there are different levels, with the lower levels being awarded to hundreds of people a year and many thousands over the years, so not sufficient in itself for every awardee to warrant an article about them on Wikipedia.  In any event, WP:ANYBIO does not automatically confer notability.  Curb Safe Charmer ( talk ) 21:48, 7 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I have no idea where or how you have considered the award , as it seems clear that you did not consider that in your nomination statement.  That said, a WP:BEFORE shows that the subject is a recipeint of Order of the Niger .  Orders awarded by a sovereign state are considered notable enough to meet WP:ANYBIO.  The Order of the Niger is Nigeria's equivalent of the Awards and decorations of the United States government ,and the Orders, decorations, and medals of the United Kingdom , and these are generally sufficient to pass WP:ANYBIO .  Shoerack ( talk ) 18:53, 8 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Can you provide sources that talk about the individual?  The award is likely notable, but we need things about the person, not reports of what he's said about things.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:47, 10 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Shoerack : At the point of nomination, I had been unable to verify that he had received the award, as what appeared to be the definitive list didn't include him.  See

Discussion outcome: delete
Qupital: Oddly enough Forbes (Contributor) article was in the regular tab and not News, guess Google is filtering them out now?  Results for 橋彼道 (or 桥彼道, they didn't seem to care much) were pretty much the same, Sogou might have been slightly better than Baidu for this one but nothing of note there either.  There's an article in Cifnews (雨果网) but it's a paid placement (properly marked, won't bother going into their reliability).  I judge WP:NONENG to be very unlikely also.  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 13:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Finance , Companies ,  and China .  Alpha3031 ( t • c ) 13:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per the lack of significant coverage in reliable sources .  I did not find significant coverage in reliable sources about the subject in my searches for sources that were not about funding or partnernship announcements ( 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , and 5 ) or an interview with the founders that does not provide significant coverage of the company.  Qupital ( traditional Chinese : 橋彼道 ; simplified Chinese : 桥彼道 ) does not meet Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline and Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies)#Primary criteria .  Cunard ( talk ) 05:09, 26 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This is a company therefore GNG/ WP:NCORP requires at least two deep or significant sources with each source containing "Independent Content" showing in-depth information *on the company* .   "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject .  I'm unable to identify any references that meet the criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing ++ 16:22, 30 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
Perryville, Indiana: This is an exception, being as far back as I can go an intersection with a couple of random buildings (and on GMaps, a cell tower).  Searching was difficult due to a civil war battle in Kentucky and other false hits, so it pretty much comes down to Baker's place names book, which we've had enough issues with that I'm not willing to take as a sole authority.  Mangoe ( talk ) 15:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Indiana .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 16:21, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Geneva, Indiana .  Buildings near the intersection that marks Perryville have addresses in Geneva, Indiana.  I don't know whether Perryville is inside Geneva's town limits or not.  This is not Perrysville, Indiana (with an S) in Vermillion County, Indiana .  There might have been more buildings and households here when farming was more labour-intensive and individual farms were smaller, but that's just a guess.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 16:40, 14 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Going by the post office town name is a very bad idea; the areas covered are typically much larger than the towns themselves.  In this case the intersection is well over three miles outside the town limits.  Mangoe ( talk ) 02:03, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment This one is hard, hopefully UncleG will find something.  James.folsom ( talk ) 00:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No sources but that book, and no way to find the original source.  Nothing in google.  Can't write and article with one source.  James.folsom ( talk ) 23:20, 15 March 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!  20:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  Is there any further support for an article Merge?  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  21:22, 28 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Subject lacks the needed coverage to meet the WP:GEOLAND .  Let'srun ( talk ) 20:29, 29 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
Elan Journo: The article only has one secondary source, which talks about Journo in very little depth.  SparklyNights 00:24, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Journalism ,  and Israel .  SparklyNights 00:24, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No sign of independent biographical coverage or reviews.  The "secondary source" mentioned in the nomination appears to be reader commentary about one of his articles, not even a reliable source.  -- RL0919 ( talk ) 00:48, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Philosophy , England ,  and California .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 02:19, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Couldn't find anything secondary and significant.  NotAGenious ( talk ) 05:18, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , no SIGCOV.  NM 19:33, 19 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
Voice of Life: No effort in article to demonstrate notability.  All sources in article are to self-published/primary sources.  No significant coverage in independent, secondary sources, just a handful of WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS .  Dclemens1971 ( talk ) 02:32, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio , Christianity ,  and Uganda .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 06:13, 18 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!  02:44, 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: delete
North Macedonia–Peru relations: The topic of these relations does not receive significant coverage in multiple sources.  Relations don't include aspects that typically add to notability like embassies, 1 high level visit in 17 years of relations, significant trade (Peruvian exports to the state have been nonexistent in the years 2009, 2012, 2014 and 2016.) or migration LibStar ( talk ) 04:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , North Macedonia ,  and Peru .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:18, 30 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hi, I'm posting here too just in case, but I've added some more information that hopefully benefits the article.  (both this and the Montenegrin article).  Cheers.  180app ( talk ) 21:01, 5 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 06:30, 6 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:19, 13 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Not seeing WP:SIGCOV of this topic in independent WP:RSs .  Yilloslime ( talk ) 17:44, 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
Artesia, New Mexico infanticide case: Alleged crime which has achieved some short-lived media attention but doesn't presently have lasting notability.  Doesn't seem to have anything to indicate it's more notable than numerous other alleged criminal acts.  Neiltonks ( talk ) 10:45, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions .  Neiltonks ( talk ) 10:45, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete There are 25,000 homicides every year in the USA and we don't need an article about all of them.   Indeed, we probably need an article about less than 0.1% of them, and certainly not ones like this that have made little to no national news.  WP:NOTNEWS .  Black Kite (talk) 11:01, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:SUSPECT — siro χ o 11:12, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per WP:NOTNEWS .  The BLP issues aside (which I've edited out per BLP:CRIME ), this story has very little national coverage and is mostly tabloid at this point.  Perhaps it will gain more attention later, but if it does, then it can be brought back into main-space, ideally after AfC.  -- Kcmastrpc ( talk ) 12:04, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete . WP:NOTNEWS . -- Bedivere ( talk ) 14:35, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete There is nothing to indicate that this crime has notability, and as others have mentioned there are BLP issues regarding the suspect.  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 17:12, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events and New Mexico .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:59, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete This is a run-of-the-mill incident that resulted in an accusation of murder, and this type of incident is all too commonplace.  There is no good reason to keep a Wikipedia article about this.  Cullen328 ( talk ) 18:02, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per WP:Event , "shock news" and viral content are usually not notable unless something gives them enduring significance.   It appears there is viral video being reposted by tabloids for it's shock value and ability to generate clicks.  Denaar ( talk ) 20:37, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete WP:NOTNEWS Someone who's wrong on the internet ( talk ) 20:40, 29 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] delete - one event.  Not notable enough for inclusion as of today.  BabbaQ ( talk ) 18:49, 30 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I do not see anything in this article that makes this incident stand out from others like it.  Daniel Case ( talk ) 01:50, 2 July 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
Baramati district: Not notable.  Aintabli ( talk ) 22:33, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography , India ,  and Maharashtra .  Aintabli ( talk ) 22:33, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I am also nominating the following articles, because they are all part of a series of unsourced/poorly-sourced creations from 2012 revolving around proposed districts in India: Pandharpur district ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Shrirampur district ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Malegaon district ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) Aintabli ( talk ) 22:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Agree to deletion of Baramati district and all nominated pages.  There is no significant coverage on these districts.  One source on the Baramati district fails to open and many nominated pages do not even have any sources linked.  They all fail notability.  RangersRus ( talk ) 20:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : all fail WP:NPLACE and WP:GNG .  S0091 ( talk ) 15:14, 18 February 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
MaNaDr: Sources are basically primary sources.  Doesn't satisfy our WP:GNG at best.  Jamiebuba ( talk ) 09:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Singapore .  Jamiebuba ( talk ) 09:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , while I can't speak for other countries which MaNaDr operates in, it is certainly notable and widely used in Singapore.  I have just found more third-party sources referencing MaNaDr and I will edit them into the page shortly.  -- Surrealityy ( talk ) 09:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as not notable, nor per GNG nor per NCORP. -- Moem-Meom ( talk ) 11:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  I believe MaNaDr is notable as it is quite well-known at least in Singapore.  Also, while Google search of "MaNaDr" mostly turns up primary sources, searching for Singapore telehealth apps in general will bring up many secondary sources that talk about MaNaDr.  -- Surrealityy ( talk ) 17:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , fails WP:GNG .  The available secondary sources are trivial, most only discuss this service as part of a group of other similar services.  SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 23:11, 2 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
Lowyat.net: gnews almost exclusively comes up with its own website.  Also nominating the website founder who I believe fails WP:BIO Vijandren Ramadass ( edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views ) LibStar ( talk ) 06:22, 6 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Websites and Malaysia .  AllyD ( talk ) 07:57, 6 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions .  LibStar ( talk ) 10:54, 11 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 06:26, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Fails WP:WEBCRIT , notability is not established.  Fancy Refrigerator ( talk ) 15:09, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 06:30, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Fails WP:WEBCRIT and could not find any WP:SIGCOV in WP:BEFORE search.  Lightoil ( talk ) 04:08, 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
Kimberly Morgan: Let'srun ( talk ) 21:23, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Women , Beauty pageants ,  and Mississippi .  Let'srun ( talk ) 21:23, 10 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Does not appear to be notable.  A BEFORE search showed nothing significant.  Flutter Dash 344 ( talk ) 00:58, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Lacks indepth coverage fails WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 07:18, 16 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
Lakhan Kumar Singla: Literally nothing to establish notability here.  Vanderwaalforces ( talk ) 21:27, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India .  Shellwood ( talk ) 22:11, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Haryana-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:27, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I searched for in-depth coverage from multiple independent reliable sources but couldn’t find a single one!  The subject fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL as he was never elected as an MLA or MP.  Grab Up - Talk 12:12, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Clearly failed WP:NPOL .  Youknowwhoistheman ( talk ) 14:29, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Per nom.  Fails WP:NPOL .  The degree of significance of the subject and of role as politician is not enough to warrant a page on the subject.  RangersRus ( talk ) 12:33, 23 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