hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
72F fusion protein vaccine : Kwkintegrator ( talk ) 01:15, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Medicine and Technology .  Kwkintegrator ( talk ) 01:15, 26 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] delete per nom.  Artem.G ( talk ) 09:16, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
A Wasey Mominyar : I can't find any evidence of WP:GNG from his very brief career.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:45, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Cricket ,  and Afghanistan .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:45, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Definitely hasn't played first-class cricket, and his matches which have been recorded were minor matches.  Fails WP:NCRIC .  StickyWicket aka AA ( talk ) 22:12, 26 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per nom.  Fails WP:GNG , and given he hasn't played any notable games under WP:NCRIC , there isn't a suitable redirect here.  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 10:07, 28 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG and no suitable redirect target, as Etisalat Cricket Club doesn't exist (and thus neither does a list article for its players, which would be the likely redirect target).  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 08:01, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:GNG , he has not played in any notable games and the ones he played in are minor.  Shadow 345110 (talk) 18:57, 29 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per norm.  Jamiebuba ( talk ) 20:39, 31 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
2001: A Space Odyssey : Clarityfiend ( talk ) 09:39, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Science fiction and fantasy-related deletion discussions .  Qwaiiplayer ( talk ) 12:10, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete A pseudo-disambiguation page that's effectively a WP:REDUNDANTFORK of 2001: A Space Odyssey (disambiguation) .  The DAB page should be moved to this name space as well.  Qwaiiplayer ( talk ) 12:11, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to 2001: A Space Odyssey (film) .  Clearly the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC , in which case this page should be redirected there and an appropriate hatnote should be added to the film's article.  Qwaiiplayer ( talk ) 12:34, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per previous.  Godtres ( talk ) 14:51, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Seems like a redundant article when 2001: A Space Odyssey (disambiguation) is already available.  Grahaml35 ( talk ) 17:40, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , and move the disambiguation page here.  SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 01:11, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , and move the disambiguation page here, per @ SailingInABathTub .  Brachy 08 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:21, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I object to moving the dab page here.  The film is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC .  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 12:29, 14 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Then just keep it.  Brachy 08 (Talk) (Contribs) 07:56, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and move 2001: A Space Odyssey (film) as very clear primary topic.  -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 15:26, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and move 2001: A Space Odyssey (film) per Necrothesp.  The film page did not link to the novel but I added a see also, which obviates need for a disambiguation.  Sirfurboy🏄 ( talk ) 08:16, 19 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
Anton Lim : In 2023, the problems with its unreferenced content, adverted to multiple times, have remained.  In my opinion, once that content were stripped away, we would find that this article is verifiably about a veterinarian from The Philippines who is active in philanthropic work, particularly as a Rotarian .  What we would not find is that a Wikipedia article that meets any number of tests for notability, starting with the General notability guideline and including but not limited to WP:NBIO .  Given the article's 11 year existence on en.wp, it would appear to me that this article should be tested at a deletion discussion.  That said, I would have no objection to a WP:G11 outcome.  As always, more than happy to be proven wrong.  Shirt58 ( talk ) 🦘 10:02, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and Philippines .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:40, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This article popped up in my suggested edits.  I had a squizz, and it immediately became apparent that it exists at the behest of someone with a vested interest and non-npov.  If it wasn't for the overt flowery praise I might not have bothered with the G11 tag, but regardless, as it is I don't really see how it is encyclopedic or noteworthy.  AbominableIntelligence ( talk ) 04:21, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Redirect to Kabang .  It seems that most News mentions about him points to the dog whom he took care of.  I've also added a cited mention about his caretaker role in the target article.  -- Lenticel ( talk ) 11:28, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete to removed unsourced BLP vios, then Redirect to Kabang per above.  Looks G11, BLP, fails GNG and BIO.  WP:BLP states "Be very firm about the use of high-quality sources"' ; BLPs need IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth for both content and notability per well known core policy ( WP:V and WP:BLP ) and guidelines ( WP:BIO and WP:IS , WP:RS , WP:SIGCOV ).  // Timothy :: talk 06:13, 28 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm okay with a delete first and then redirect -- Lenticel ( talk ) 08:16, 28 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
Afghan Army (1978-1992) : The only new data in the article, the equipment list sourced from  Никитенко Е.  Г.  Афганистан: От войны 80-х до прогноза новых войн.  — М. : Астрель : ACT, 2004, has been amended in the process of transcription to increase equipment numbers falsely: 768 to 1568 tanks, 2900 artillery pieces to more than 4,000, etc.  There is nothing here which should not be easily merged with Afghan Army before deletion.  Buckshot06 (talk) 02:23, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Buckshot06 (talk) 02:15, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions .  Buckshot06 (talk) 02:17, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Afghanistan-related deletion discussions .  Buckshot06 (talk) 02:17, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete A clear WP:TNT case where the article creator copied sources from the Russian Wikipedia article and then changed the information.  Kges1901 ( talk ) 02:30, 13 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : There is also Armed Forces of the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan which appears to cover the same topic exactly.  TulsaPoliticsFan ( talk ) 18:51, 13 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
Henry Garrett (politician) : Completely fails WP:BASIC .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 11:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and United States of America .  AusLondonder ( talk ) 11:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Nothing major seems to be popping up.  There is some independent coverage, mostly referring to "former mayor has brain tumour", (1) and the Buccanner Commission named their new HQ after him - which seems slightly notable.  (2) .  Given his period of service as Police Chief and Mayor was pre-2010, there's probably some stuff out there in newspapers.com but pre-dates reliable online coverage.  That being said, it's going to be hyper-local coverage of hyper-local politics and I doubt it would pass GNG anyway.  Hemmers ( talk ) 14:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Police and Texas .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 14:14, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , without prejudice against recreation in the future if somebody can do better.  Mayors aren't "inherently" entitled to Wikipedia articles just because they existed — the notability test for a mayor isn't passed by minimally verifying his existence, and requires you to write and source substantive content about his political impact : specific things he did, specific projects he spearheaded, specific effects his mayoralty had on the development of the city, and on and so forth.  This isn't even close to what's required.  Bearcat ( talk ) 14:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : No context for Stand alone article.  I can't necessary say a mayor is that notable.  Well, there are even no verifiable source!  Fails WP: N All the Best!  Otuọcha ( talk ) 09:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 02:40, 15 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
Starling (software) : Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 17:49, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Computing , Internet ,  and Software .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 17:49, 20 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 19:45, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - last commit on GitHub was over 10 years ago and it hasn't really received any lasting coverage as far as I can tell.  I very much doubt this has achieved any sort of lasting notability.  ― novov (t c) 04:45, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Does not meet WP:NSOFT .  StreetcarEnjoyer ( talk ) 23:39, 28 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
Cream (software) : It's just a configuration of the Vim (text editor) , definitely doesn't deserve a standalone article.  Yeah, it's not even a software, merely settings for another text editor.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  I've just noticed it was nominated before (in 2007, 16 years ago).  I'm completely dissatisfied with how it went (keep - info useful, keep - informative, keep - per someone).  Definitely worth it to discuss again.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:48, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] OK, now I'm just confused.  I've definitely checked for previous deletions in the history before nominating, and after I nominated I saw the previous AfD, just thought I missed it in the history.  Looked again - nothing, probably this article indeed was deleted before, but someone reintroduced it.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:52, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] No, I've checked again, this article was created before the first nomination.  OK, I just assumed that if it was previously nominated, then it should've been in the summary, looks like it is a wrong assumption.  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:59, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The name is now used by a dieting app for smartphones.  This software was last updated in 2011 and doesn't seem to have been notable then, or now.  Lack of any kind of sourcing, what's given now in the article is a download link/repository.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:52, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : "Keep because it's informative" was the result of the last AfD, Bonkers.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Article fails WP:GNG , WP:NSOFT , WP:NCORP .  While I can't find any specific examples, I can imagine a situation where a bundle of config scripts could be notable.  However this article's subject does not appear to be notable as it fails even the most basic notability criteria.  - Aoidh ( talk ) 03:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No good place to redirect.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 15:18, 27 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
List of Participated Countries Statistics in Mister International : Fram ( talk ) 14:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : agree that this is a lot of detailed stats for a beauty pageant, or any competition.  To justify a table like this we'd need sources that discuss the numbers in detail, not just the winners.  Also note the same table appearing at Mister International .  Could be deleted from there too, along with a few other tables.  Are the raw stats the only available material about this topic from reliable sources?  Wizmut ( talk ) 18:34, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Beauty pageants-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:45, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 14:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Thailand-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 17:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , per nom.  In any case it's redundant as the content is currently duplicated in the main article.  -- Paul_012 ( talk ) 07:00, 31 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
Rajendra Singh Solanki : DreamRimmer ( talk ) 18:31, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Politicians , India ,  and Rajasthan .  DreamRimmer ( talk ) 18:41, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy delete A7 as non notable.  Mccapra ( talk ) 19:29, 31 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Destani Wolf : The strongest attempt at a notability claim here is that she's been a contributor to Grammy-nominated albums -- but NMUSIC #8 requires the subject to have personally been singled out as an award nominee in her own name for her own contributions, and simply having appeared as a guest musician on an album that somebody else got a Grammy nomination for doesn't count. But nothing else here meets any NMUSIC criteria at all, and the referencing is depending far too heavily on bad primary and/or unreliable sources that aren't support for notability -- Bandcamp, blogs, IMDB, etc.  -- while the only reliable sources in the bunch are a couple of hits of in the hyperlocal community media of her own hometown (but just having a couple of hits of "local person does stuff" coverage in her own hometown media isn't enough to get her over the bar all by itself if it's the best sourcing she has), a PopMatters album review that briefly mentions Destani Wolf's name without being about her in any non-trivial sense, and a Pitchfork article that fails to name Destani Wolf at all, serving only as tangential verification of one of the Grammy nominations that she wasn't actually the recipient of.  Again: she can't claim "notable because Grammy", because she wasn't personally named as the recipient of any Grammy nominations in her own name, and was merely a contributor to albums that other people got Grammy nominations for, so nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt her from having to pass WP:GNG on much better referencing than this.  Bearcat ( talk ) 22:48, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and California .  Bearcat ( talk ) 22:48, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - WP:TOOSOON for now.  I could only find passing mentions of her in reliable secondary sources, doesn't yet meet WP:MUSICBIO per nomination.  Wikishovel ( talk ) 07:12, 11 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I am OK with this designation.  I don't know procedure.  Are you able to move to draft?  Thank you!  SeriousMooonlight ( talk ) 03:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  per nom, but also, I don't think there's any reason to draftify this, as I don't see any indication that she's likely to get a lot of coverage in the next six months.  -- asilvering ( talk ) 00:59, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - an accumulation of mentions.  This is probably the best we've got, but there ain't a whole lot of analysis and it isn't the great source either.  TLA (talk) 03:31, 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
Arber Haliti : Appears to fail #5 of WP:SPORTBASIC , which is the minimum requirement for an article here.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:28, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Albania .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:28, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete If even Albanian madia does not have coverage of him, the article is far from meeting the WP:NOTABILITY criteria.  Ktrimi991 ( talk ) 19:51, 18 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 07:23, 19 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Article fails WP:GNG per my BEFORE search.  Jogurney ( talk ) 02:17, 21 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 18:36, 22 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no GNG-passing sources.  Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 16:32, 24 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
Anil K. Antony : Was never elected into a political office that makes one inherently notable TheWikiholic ( talk ) 18:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions .  TheWikiholic ( talk ) 18:02, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 18:04, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:40, 20 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Similar to other candidates, there is a mass creation of articles for the ongoing General Election in India.  Many articles like these have already been deleted.  These candidates are just nominated, not elected, and they fail to meet WP:NPOL .  The coverage is solely due to their election candidacy, which also fails WP:BLP1E .  Grab Up - Talk 15:29, 21 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Clearly failed WP:NPOL .  Youknowwhoistheman ( talk ) 16:26, 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
Antonello Tabacco : [4] Angelo ( talk ) 23:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Football .  Angelo ( talk ) 23:37, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:23, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 19:52, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 21:26, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete lacks indepth coverage fails WP:GNG . -- Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 12:14, 30 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