hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Nawab Jassi Khan: Patient Zero talk 23:45, 14 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and Pakistan .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:15, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - also the redirects are making this confusing.  Dazzling4 ( talk ) 03:50, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and redirect - as earlier.  Can the admins also full-protect the redirect so that it doesn't get edited again?  There are powerful tribal affinities and folklores at play.  -- Kautilya3 ( talk ) 12:40, 15 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment this title has already been redirected to Sudhan#History and particulars , meaning that either this AfD is moot or the redirect needs to be  to allow completion of the AfD. --User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 02:52, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Not exactly moot.  There are frequent attempts to turn it into a full-fledged page.  Even now, the redirect page has content, if you notice.  It was deleted, but people inserted some content again after the AfD was filed.  The redirect page needs to be full-protected or at least EC-protected given that this topic falls under WP:ARBIPA .  -- Kautilya3 ( talk ) 09:36, 21 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and then redirect and protect.  If a properly sourced article ever develops at the target, it can go through AfC.  // Timothy :: talk 16:30, 21 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
Janaki Yugantar English Boarding School: The only basis for keeping was because of a presumption of notability for secondary schools, which no longer applies following a discussion that can be found at WP:SCHOOLOUTCOMES .  The only supporting reference was the school's own website, which clearly fails WP:ORGIND .  I can find no evidence of passing WP:NORG or WP:GNG in Nepali (जानकी युगान्तर इङ्लिस बोर्डिङ स्कुल) or English, I would expect some sourcing in the latter if this is a notable school as English is the medium used by this school.  All I can find are Wikipedia mirrors and the school's own Facebook page, which seems to have replaced their website, which looks to have been shut down.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools ,  and Nepal .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:31, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - to make matters worse, the article was created by an account with the same name as the school, clear WP:COI .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:33, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Unreferenced and we are a lot stricter on school notability these days.  Fails WP:NSCHOOL .  LibStar ( talk ) 23:26, 27 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No references and WP:COI .  Search doesn't bring up anything significant.  - Imcdc Contact 02:18, 1 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per nominator.  DarkHorseMayhem ( talk ) 16:43, 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
Paschim Banga Vigyan Mancha: There may be sources in Bengali or other languages I can’t access, but on present showing it’s not notable.  Mccapra ( talk ) 03:30, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Science , India ,  and West Bengal .  Mccapra ( talk ) 03:30, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Gnews comes up with little.  Insufficient coverage to meet WP:ORG .  LibStar ( talk ) 23:25, 23 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
Betsy Bobel: Also appears to be some COI here as well.  Let'srun ( talk ) 00:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Women , Beauty pageants ,  and Indiana .  Let'srun ( talk ) 00:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , it's a professional profile, WP:NOTLINKEDIN .  If the subject turns out to be notable, still needs WP:TNT .  I've removed an unsourced claim as well as some clear PROMO, still not in good shape.  — siro χ o 06:59, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , I did not find any better sources on this that would pass WP:GNG in my search.  Actualcpscm ( talk ) 13:37, 6 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
ContractZen: Shellwood ( talk ) 12:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Fails NCOMPANY.  Sources are unreliable.  Notability is seemingly inherited from other companies incl.  PwC and Ingram Micro.  Fancy Refrigerator ( talk ) 12:47, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Newsdesk and a Microsoft PR piece aren't RS nor helpful in establishing notability.  The rest seem to tangentially mention this company.  Agree with PROMO.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 23:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete blatantly promotional.  Partofthemachine ( talk ) 23:59, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Not seeing truly independent coverage even in Finnish sources.  There's some hits, but it's all press releases etc. authored by the company itself.  - Ljleppan ( talk ) 07:11, 23 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : also didn't find much.  Paradise Chronicle ( talk ) 21:29, 25 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
Athena Kolbe: No widespread coverage in WP:RS , not too different from a regular university professor.  GuardianH ( talk ) 19:45, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.  Aintabli ( talk ) 19:59, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators and Women .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:16, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Appears to have an article in the Lancet, but also to have floated among a number of academic institutions at the asst professor level.  Does not pass PROF. 128.252.55.251 ( talk ) 19:42, 1 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Article fails to establish notability under WP:GNG or WP:NACADEMIC , and I couldn't find better sources to establish notability here.  Actualcpscm ( talk ) 20:57, 5 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Social science , North Carolina , Lebanon ,  and Medicine .  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 21:17, 5 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Question: see these Google Scholar results: cited 671 times - is that a lot or a little, for purposes of notability?  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 21:31, 5 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It's not that much in the grand scheme of things.  More helpful is the H-index ; hers is 10.  I'm not intimately familiar with the index, but this says that's typical for an associate professor, and that tracks with my experiences.  NACADEMIC's threshold for notability is a named chair, that probably corresponds to an h-index above 30.  These are rough numbers that depend a lot on the academic field, but I think we can't demonstrate notability just based on citations here.  Actualcpscm ( talk ) 21:43, 5 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
Tolendi Arystanbekov: Andrei Romanenko ( talk ) 22:54, 4 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Poetry ,  and Kazakhstan .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:50, 5 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:13, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Notability not established.  Checked Kazakh article, but don't see additional info.  Flurrious ( talk ) 20:00, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete lacks indepth coverage fails WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 01:37, 18 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
Pankaj Sanghvi: Fails WP:NBASIC and WP:NPOL .  SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 15:00, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians and India .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 15:08, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Madhya Pradesh-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:11, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy Delete - fails to meet WP:NPOL he do not won any election in your political career, so, this article can removed.  ~~ αvírαm | (tαlk) 16:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  As always, people do not get Wikipedia articles just for standing as candidates in elections they didn't win, but this makes no other claim that he has notability for other reasons.  Bearcat ( talk ) 17:46, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Serving the congress, but never having been elected, is puffery.  There is no sourcing that supports even GNG/BASIC to warrant keeping an article here.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 19:55, 22 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Creation of articles for un-elected politicians is very common, the subject doesn’t passes WP:NPOL and not even WP:GNG as Oaktree b mentioned.  — Syed A. Hussain Quadri ( talk ) 06:27, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per above.  ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️ Let's Talk !  11:43, 23 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per all above arguments.  Toad ette ( Merry Christmas, and a happy new year ) 07:44, 25 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 10:46, 26 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
Simon Courcelles: Did some digging and found most mentions about his brother who had his face cut open.  The rest are passing mentions and do not contribute to WP:SIGCOV .  Kline • talk to me!  • contribs 01:49, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Ice hockey ,  and Canada .  Kline • talk to me!  • contribs 01:49, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Another of the many hundreds of NN articles created in defiance of consensus and notability standards by Dolovis, the subject never played beyond the semi-professional level, and has never met any iteration of NHOCKEY, never mind of the GNG.  Ravenswing 10:03, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Subject does not meet the WP:GNG because of a lack of WP:SIGCOV showing notability.  The only sources currently are databases.  Let'srun ( talk ) 16:22, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Does not meet WP:NHOCKEY , or any other notability guideline.  Drowssap SMM 19:01, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep : Some coverage in French.  [20] and [21] .  Had a major injury from the sport he played, so it mostly focuses on that aspect of his career.  I suppose having a major injury and returning to the sport gets you notability, he's only played in the junior leagues, not I don't think he's otherwise notable.  Some coverage here of his arrest for drunk driving [22] , [23] .  Some coverage here [24] .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Oaktree b The major injury is his brother, Sebastien.  Kline • talk to me!  • contribs 03:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , he's not notable, the first two articles I've mentioend focus on his brother for the most part.  3 and 4 are about a drunk driving charge, 5 seems to be about him.  Not enough for notability.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 04:21, 11 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
New Swinton Stadium: A new article can always be created if a stadium proposal ever gets beyond the planning stages.  J Mo 101 ( talk ) 21:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby league-related deletion discussions .  J Mo 101 ( talk ) 21:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:20, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:20, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:20, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , article purely speculation.  Mn1548 ( talk ) 14:33, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete speculation and not covered in sufficient detail in sources to warrant a separate article.  This article is linked once in Swinton Lions article, but don't see value in redirecting there, as this stadium doesn't exist, and the article doesn't mention it by this name.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 15:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Name checks, nothing substantive found.  Rupples ( talk ) 17:32, 20 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
Albert Vivian D'Costa: Redirect to List of people from Goa as an WP:ATD since subject is mentioned there.  CycloneYoris talk!  21:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  CycloneYoris talk!  21:37, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Engineering , Transportation ,  and Goa .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 22:15, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No sources since the creation of the page.  The subject is not notable, well known, and a simple search would not show any results on him from reliable sources.  Fails WP:BIO and WP:GNG .  RangersRus ( talk ) 14:33, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Entirely based on statements without citing a single WP:Reliable Source .  Poorly composed and published.  Sameeerrr ( talk ) 17:45, 12 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : lacks reliable sources to support its claims and fails to establish the subject's notability, making it a candidate for deletion.  Waqar 💬 19:42, 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
U.S. Army Medical Materiel Center – Southwest Asia: Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs ) 22:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military , Medicine , South Korea ,  and United States of America .  Sungodtemple ( talk • contribs ) 22:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Asia , Middle East , Kuwait ,  and Qatar .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:31, 14 February 2024 (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 ) 23:28, 20 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
Associated Press Service: The nominator of the RfD did not find any evidence that the Associated Press Service still exists.  Participants observed that the entity appeared to have gone offline midway through 2023, and there weren't enough sources to establish notability.  Sources that do appear in the stub are no longer working.  Jay 💬 17:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism , News media ,  and Pakistan .  Jay 💬 17:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Companies .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 18:26, 23 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I never heard of APS before.  Seems like a self published source.  --— Saqib ( talk | contribs ) 07:37, 27 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per nom.  No evidence that APS still exists, let alone that it's notable.  Dan Bloch ( talk ) 17:31, 27 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
Malek Mehri: Zero in-depth sourcing.   Fails WP:GNG .  Onel 5969 TT me 12:12, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Tunisia .  Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:39, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - a lot of what I can find in Arabic just seems to be announcements of whether he is in a squad or not like Nessma and Edawla . I can't find anything that's clear and obvious WP:SIGCOV . Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:08, 18 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:SIGCOV . Hey man im josh ( talk ) 19:16, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : BLP, fails GNG, BIO. There are no IS RS with SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. Source in article is a database record. BEFORE showed nothing that meets SIGCOV, game news, database, promo. 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 08:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 11:30, 21 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
Saturday Live (British TV program): According the article itself, it was a two hour long show that ran from 2005 to 2011.  A WP:BEFORE search would appear to indicate some questions about whether this purported Sky News show actually ever happened.  WP:NTV would appear to be applicable here.  Shirt58 ( talk ) 🦘 09:47, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Journalism , News media , Television ,  and United Kingdom .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Per nom, this article has somehow been around for 15 years, and yet has zero sources (violating WP:OR ) and only consists of 3 sentences; one of which is incomplete.  Mjks28 ( talk ) 13:40, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I couldn't find any coverage whatsoever.  Toadspike [Talk] 09:11, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
G.I. Joe fallacy: If it is just a case of Cognitive bias , it can at best be merged there.  BD2412 T 00:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Psychology-related deletion discussions .  BD2412 T 00:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Two unique references, one of which is a non-peer-reviewed working paper and the other a blog.   I can find plenty of other mentions but all are SPS.   Looks like a case of WP:NEOLOGISM .  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 01:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Should this phrase get any real traction and coverage, we can always re-create the article, as it's just a definition right now anyway.  Cortador ( talk ) 16:18, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : A neologism that doesn't have any notability at the moment.  Drowssap SMM 18:55, 10 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The sources only give enough for a definition.  Rjj iii ( talk ) 19:54, 11 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