hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Apni Party Pakistan: — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 14:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions .  — Saqib ( talk I contribs ) 14:02, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Politics .  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 15:03, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Unable to find sources that show that this meets WP:NORG .  If it had won a seat in the national or provincial parliament there would be some presumption of notability at least.  - MPGuy2824 ( talk ) 15:06, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Notability not established.   The only reference is a list of all the political parties in Pakistan – 168 of them.   They're not all notable, or worthy of mention.   Many, if not most, will disappear without a candidate who wins anything, or having any noteworthy coverage.   If its candidate wins a seat in the next election, or in a few years, it can have an article.   Unless notability is established in some way, this one should be deleted.  Ira Leviton ( talk ) 22:38, 18 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , A single sentence and a single source simply stating that the party exists isn't enough for notability.  The party hasn't won a single election yet (that I could find), nor could I find any reporting of the party, or even a profile on what the party believes.  We just don't have enough for an article at this point.  - Samoht27 ( talk ) 18:18, 22 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment , articles author made a request for undeletion before this deletion discussion was finished.  This could be relevant.  - Samoht27 ( talk ) 18:23, 22 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
Spanish Quidditch Cup: There doesn't seem to be much coverage.  I checked Spanish Wikipedia and the article there was deleted for "no encyclopedic relevance."  StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk ) 19:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports , Europe ,  and Spain .  StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk ) 19:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Does not look promising.  Since nobody has ! voted yet, does the nominator want to bundle 2016 Spanish Quidditch Cup ?  Then Bizkaia Boggarts can be discussed on its own.  Geschichte ( talk ) 22:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] It would make sense to bundle it so sure.  StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk ) 23:55, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] 2016 Spanish Quidditch Cup was never bundled, but delete Spanish Quidditch Cup.  Geschichte ( talk ) 09:12, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : both, per nom and StreetcarEnjoyer.  // Timothy :: talk 18:39, 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
San Diego-Imperial Council: No independent notability shown in reliable secondary sources.  There is one secondary source, about a small fire in 2004, which does not make the council/camp notable--and one wonders whose bottle rockets they were.  Councils/camps from the BSA or any other organization are rarely notable in their own right and this one is no expection.  Drmies ( talk ) 21:48, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Scouting ,  and California .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:35, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and re-direct to List of councils (Boy Scouts of America) .  Does not meet WP:NCORP to warrant its standalone article.  Graywalls ( talk ) 10:37, 14 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete As per Drmies.  Axad12 ( talk ) 18:05, 17 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
Kim Ugu-io: Tails Wx 13:45, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of North Korea-related deletion discussions .  Tails Wx 13:45, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Notability is WP:NOTINHERITED , ergo this violates WP:NOTGENEALOGY , ergo WP:A7 applies.  BrigadierG ( talk ) 14:24, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I won't be opposed to an A7-criteria speedy delete here.  Tails Wx 16:37, 31 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
Gambia–Spain relations: Trade is very low, Spanish aid and investment is non existent as stated in the article.  No evidence of state visits or significant migration or cultural interaction.  Fails GNG.  LibStar ( talk ) 15:10, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bilateral relations , Africa ,  and Spain .  LibStar ( talk ) 15:10, 31 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom and per dearth of WP:SIGCOV .  Yilloslime ( talk ) 00:30, 2 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete -- Yet another example of a standalone article being created for every combination of two nations, no matter how insignificant their connexion may be.  The subject is not encyclopaedic, the sources presented are all WP:PRIMARY (government press), and there is no secondary analysis, depth or other indication of notability.  I can find no scholarly treatment of this relationship nor mentions in reputable journals.  Merging to one or both countries' articles might be possible, but I can find no info particularly worth merging and no sourcing on which to base such a merge.  Redir begs the question of which country to redirect towards (and do we really expect this as a search string?).  Cheers, Last1in ( talk ) 13:29, 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
Atefeh Khademolreza: The strongest notability claim here is awards from minor regional film festivals that aren't prominent enough to confer instant notability freebies on their winners -- that only attaches to a narrow tier of internationally prominent film festivals whose awards get reported by the media as news , such as Cannes, Berlin, Venice, Toronto or Sundance, and not to just any film festival on earth whose awards you have to source to the festival's own self-published content about itself because media reportage treating the award as news doesn't exist.  But the awards here are the latter, not the former.  It also attempted to claim a "nomination" for a more notable award, but I had to strip that as inaccurate marketing torque -- TIFF's awards simply adjudicate and consider every film present in the entire festival lineup, and do not release any special shortlists of finalists before announcing the winner.  So being a "nominee" for a TIFF award that the film didn't actually win is not noteworthy, because there isn't a functional distinction between being a "nominee" for a TIFF award and simply having one's film be present at TIFF.  As for the sourcing, there is one solid and GNG-worthy source here (#1), but that isn't enough all by itself -- everything else is cited to primary sources that are not support for notability, such as the self-published websites of directly affiliated companies or organizations, pieces of her own first-person writing, and interviews in which she's talking about herself in the first-person.  Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to have a lot more than just one GNG-worthy source.  Bearcat ( talk ) 19:29, 9 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Iran ,  and Canada .  Bearcat ( talk ) 19:29, 9 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 18:45, 16 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
Spice rack: Spice ranks are useful, in fact we have one.  However, that does not make them something which is notable enough to have a page.  The first two sources are definition, the third (of three) is a blog that (rightly) suggests that they help to organize a kitchen.  I agree, but no need for a page on that here IMHO.  Ldm1954 ( talk ) 05:38, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions .  Kpg jhp jm 06:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete or draftify if the creator/someone else wants to try improving it.  The sourcing is woefully inadequate and notability is not shown here.  March OfThe Greyhounds 17:03, 17 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 05:50, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Food and drink-related deletion discussions .  North America 1000 16:53, 22 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - essentially a wordy WP:DICDEF with some WP:NOTHOWTO thrown in (labels!).  LizardJr8 ( talk ) 04:49, 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
Yasuhiro Tanaka (footballer): Searching in Japanese, I can only find Niigata University and J League , neither of which are significant.  I couldn't find any coverage of his very brief spell in Brazil.  I've had a look at Japanese Wikipedia but none of the sources there show WP:SIGCOV .  Similar case to Yuki Toma and Kei Hirata , which were created by the same editor.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Japan .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:56, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:29, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 17:35, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails in WP:GNG .  There is also nothing in the Brazilian media about his time at Operário Ferroviário.  Svartner ( talk ) 09:15, 13 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
3D Control Systems: MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and California .  Shellwood ( talk ) 10:30, 24 March 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!  16:55, 31 March 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
Pathuri Nagabhushanam: He served as chairman of a local party at local level.  ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️ Let's Talk !  08:49, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete minor local party functionary.  Mccapra ( talk ) 08:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and Andhra Pradesh .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 09:14, 24 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
JWM: I found some mentions in some Linux-related books, but nothing that covers the software in-depth.  The review in Linux Magazine is broken, but as it stands I can't find evidence that this meets notability standards, since multiple sources are required to establish notability.  HyperAccelerated ( talk ) 17:07, 23 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  Owen× ☎ 18:46, 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
Mllat Mohammed: Theroadislong ( talk ) 18:26, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions .  Theroadislong ( talk ) 18:26, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors and Iraq .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:34, 4 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No coverage found for this writer, sources used now in the article are red, so non-RS.  Declined 3x at AFC is a bad sign, not notable.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 00:11, 5 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  Articles for Creation is pretty spotty when dealing with non-Anglophone subjects, especially academic/literary subjects; also it's only been declined once by a reviewer other than the current nominator.  Can't read the sources but there appear to be several book reviews already in the article -- could someone who can read them please comment?  Also on the articles on two other 'pedias.  Espresso Addict ( talk ) 02:08, 8 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 23:46, 11 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : BLP, I removed the unsourced material from the article ( https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mllat_Mohammed&diff=prev&oldid=1185388391 link to original version with unsourced material).  Fails GNG and NBIO.  From looking at the titles of the sources, they are about their works, not about the author and very little of the information about the author is sourced.  BLPs require strong sourcing and I don't see WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth .  If sources are found with SIGCOV, ping me.  // Timothy :: talk 12:31, 18 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
Julius Weinberger: Getting patents isn't a key to notability.  Being part of parapsychology claims in the 1970s seems not a strong attestation of notability either.  Perhaps we can briefly mention him in Stanley Krippner , but I'm even skeptical of that.  jps ( talk ) 18:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and Paranormal .  jps ( talk ) 18:23, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:34, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per nom Tirishan ( talk ) 21:54, 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: delete
Urban Music Festival: The only notability claim being made here is that it exists, which is not in and of itself enough in the absence of WP:GNG -worthy media coverage about it, but the only footnote being used for referencing at all is the event's own self-published website about itself rather than any evidence of notability-building coverage in sources independent of itself.  I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with better access to archived local and regional media in Texas can find enough improved sourcing to salvage it, but improved sourcing has to be shown to exist, not merely speculated to maybe exist.  Bearcat ( talk ) 14:09, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music , Events ,  and Texas .  Bearcat ( talk ) 14:09, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Searching for Urban music festivals brings up too many results, I've tried "Urban Music Festival Texas" and results are purely local, announcing when it takes place or who's appearing.  Not seeing mentions beyond confirmation of the festival happening/dates/appearances in local media.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:30, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I added some references.  Searching for "Urban Music Festival" Austin or the alternate names "Urban Musicfest" or "Urban Cultural Fest" helps focus the search so that you don't clutter the results with urban music festivals in other cities.  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 15:42, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I agree with Oaktree b, nearly all the sources available stem primarily from local sources.  A lot more widespread coverage is needed before this particular event becomes notable.  GuardianH ( talk ) 16:48, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  I don't think the requirements of NEVENT apply to a recurring event like this, but even if they don't, the standards of WP:GNG are not met by the available sources.  Actualcpscm scrutinize , talk 15:45, 19 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
List of songs about Dhaka: The list fails WP:INDISCRIMINATE , WP:LISTN and WP:OR .  There is little to nothing worthwhile in this list, be it content or context (and not one single source).  Geschichte ( talk ) 14:59, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Bangladesh .  Shellwood ( talk ) 16:11, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 17:20, 28 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - the consensus of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about Ahmedabad also applies here; very similar article with the same issues.  Jonathan Deamer ( talk ) 15:49, 29 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - In complete agreement with the nominator and previous voter.  --- DOOMSDAYER 520 ( TALK | CONTRIBS ) 14:25, 30 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
The Baseball Show: Let'srun ( talk ) 01:25, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Radio and United States of America .  Let'srun ( talk ) 01:25, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Baseball-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:27, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Non-notable radio program.  I can only find some confirmation of guests that were on the show, or articles about the "Pitch" series that was on tv in 2016.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:32, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The generic title (which, in addition to ESPN Radio , has also been used on unrelated programs produced by (at least) SNY , NBC Sports Boston , and WEEI ) no doubt makes it even harder to attempt to find the significant coverage that probably doesn't exist anyway, and definitely makes any redirect impractical.  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 03:42, 25 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
Eric Lyman: Articles by the subject are not proof of notability.  MarioGom ( talk ) 00:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Journalism ,  and United States of America .  MarioGom ( talk ) 00:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , South America ,  and Florida .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : seems to be an automotive journalist, but nothing about him as a person.  Delete for lack of sourcing.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:38, 19 February 2024 (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 00:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom, fails WP:ANYBIO , WP:JOURNALIST MNewnham ( talk ) 02:30, 26 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