hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians: Was previously nominated for speedy deletion, which was reduced to a PROD, which was challenged because the article went through AFC (though it never contained any sources) and seems to be the subject of dispute (though I can't see any dispute).  I'd be happy for this to be moved to draftspace to preserve the page history in case someone wants to work on it, but it's very clearly not ready for mainspace in its current form.  Additionally, I can't seem to find any secondary sources with substantial coverage of the organisation.  Tollens ( talk ) 09:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Medicine .  Tollens ( talk ) 09:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - WP:NOTWEBHOST This appears to be an on-line membership-only web site for medical professionals.  Can't readily see what they do, possibly a political-action site for medical professionals.  — Maile ( talk ) 13:52, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Clearly fails GNG.  Macktheknifeau ( talk ) 18:02, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - highly unlikely to be notable for reasons given above.  JMWt ( talk ) 19:15, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete no notability.  GraziePrego ( talk ) 03:40, 3 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
Battle of Gandgarh: The page requires deletion.  Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2024 May 7 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 00:05, 7 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Events , History , Military , Afghanistan ,  and India .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:25, 7 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Poor page with very unreliable sources from WP:RAJ written by British administrators and some others fail verification and WP:HISTRS .  RangersRus ( talk ) 15:03, 9 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Refs consists of a large corpus, with some historians.  Article is decently written and has potential for improvement.  Southasianhistorian8 ( talk ) 17:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sikhism-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:02, 11 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Poorly written article most of the Sources fall under WP:RAJ and it even fails WP:HSTRS the article should be deleted.  Delete .  Sources are without a doubt unreliable as stated by WP:RAJ UnbiasedSN ( talk ) 00:44, 14 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!  06:07, 14 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as there's no significant coverage and notability in new and RS sources.  Based Kashmiri ( talk ) 09:28, 19 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
Institute of Modern Russia: I think it's now time to evaluate it for deletion.  The article currently has one reference.  I've scanned Google News, Google Books, JSTOR, and newspapers.com and can only find one additional reference in WP:RS , here [54] where it's mentioned in one sentence as the organizer of a conference.  It notes some WP:N "advisors," however, gives no source to WP:V if they really are "advisors" and that probably doesn't matter anyway due to WP:NOTINHERITED .  It's fashionable nowadays to start "think tanks" that are basically blogs or white paper publishing platforms and this appears to be one of those.  ( Insofar as it's something like that, it seems to be fine and might even be WP:RS , but that's separate from question of its N. )  Its Form 990 [55] indicates it has a single employee who appears to be a grad student at Stony Brook University.  Chetsford ( talk ) 02:40, 17 March 2024 (UTC) ; edited 06:09, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations , Politics , Russia ,  and New York .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:27, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 20:08, 18 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
Nicole Ritchie (rower): Of the sources cited in the article, Row2K and Inquirer are trivial mentions .  Bates , Team USA , another Bates , Temple are not independent because they are bios from employers or teams of which she is a member.  Brattleboro Reformer contains significant coverage, but it is highly promotional and appears to be run of the mill reporting.  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 22:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women ,  and Sports .  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 22:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 22:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Maine and Vermont .  voorts ( talk / contributions ) 22:49, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : We do not have specific notability guidelines for rowing, but Equestrian and gymnastics highlight medaling at the Pan American Games.  Ritchie received a silver in two competitions at the 2015 Games.  Significa liberdade (she/her) ( talk ) 00:06, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : BLP, Fails GNG and NBIO.  Sources in article and BEFORE found nothing with WP:SIGCOV from WP:IS WP:RS addressing the subject directly and indepth .  BLPs require strong sourcing.  Ping me if sources are added to article that meet WP:SIGCOV.  // Timothy :: talk 06:53, 27 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:11, 27 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
Post-election pendulum for the 2023 New South Wales state election: First, the sole source is not about this subject, which appears to be WP:SYNTH .   Second, searches did not turn up enough in-depth coverage to show it passes WP:GNG .   Draft was contested with an WP:OSE argument.  Onel 5969 TT me 09:44, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics and Australia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 10:06, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The article is a split from 2023 New South Wales state election .  That article is too long to include all of the article's content.  More sources will become available as electoral analysis continues.  ABC and NSWEC sources are sufficient for now.  -- DilatoryRevolution ( talk ) 10:51, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete/merge Most of the list is at 2023_New_South_Wales_state_election#Post-election_pendulum , and I simply don't buy it that half a table will fit but a full table won't and that it needs to be duplicated in a separate article.  Same goes for the Pre-election pendulum , and with a list of candidates and a results page , surely this can be consolidated somehow.  Reywas92 Talk 14:20, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete/merge per Reywas92.  Not seeing a good reason why this needs to be split off - the main article is not overly long.  Presidentman talk · contribs ( Talkback ) 20:35, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Blatant WP:SYNTH .  QuicoleJR ( talk ) 21:20, 25 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : we have other similar articles.  Thiscouldbeauser ( talk ) 11:28, 27 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] WP:OSE is not a valid argument Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:00, 29 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge I see neither a size nor an importance argument for having this separate from 2023 New South Wales state election .  Walt Yoder ( talk ) 21:26, 29 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
Big Lurch (cosmology): I initially just tagged it to request better sources but having searched myself I didn't find any independent coverage.  The Google search '"Big Lurch" cosmology' turns up 63 results, almost none of which are relevant.  Doesn't seem notable unless there's a different technical name for the concept unmentioned in the article.  — Al-Muqanna المقنع ( talk ) 17:30, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Science and Astronomy .  — Al-Muqanna المقنع ( talk ) 17:30, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I agree; the only relevant result in Google Scholar is the Scientific American article.  Without the disambiguator, nearly all results are for the rapper Big Lurch .  Big Brake has similarly poor sourcing, but it seems to be marginally notable based on GScholar results.  One source definitely independent of the original authors and the authors of the SA article is: [1] – Laundry Pizza 03 ( d c̄ ) 18:37, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete We shouldn't create articles by sweeping up the debris at the bottom of the pop-science cliff.  XOR'easter ( talk ) 19:29, 11 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] References ^ Chimento, Luis P. ; Richarte, Martín G. (16 February 2016).  "Big brake singularity is accommodated as an exotic quintessence field".  Physical Review D .  93 (4).  arXiv : 1512.02664 .  doi : 10.1103/PhysRevD.93.043524 .  .  Delete .  Agree with the above reasons.  Aldebarium ( talk ) 19:15, 14 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
VKC Footwear: JJLiu112 ( talk ) 17:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and India .  JJLiu112 ( talk ) 17:48, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Article's history reveals it used to be even more of a blatant advertisement.  Has been nominated numerous times for speedy delete.  JJLiu112 ( talk ) 17:50, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3 ).   I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 April 10 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 18:10, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:25, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete all I find are promos for the brand.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 20:37, 10 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Per Oaktree b.  Only legit source I could find was one article from The Hindu .  Heavy Water ( talk ) 23:38, 10 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
Job Ross House: Building not listed on the NRHP.  Fails WP:GNG and WP:NBUILD .  - UtherSRG (talk) 11:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: History , United States of America ,  and Oregon .  UtherSRG (talk) 11:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions .  Necrothesp ( talk ) 10:41, 14 August 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!  17:39, 15 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
Lockheart Indigo: The Guru Gamer article is pseudonymous, as are their others.  QuietCicada chirp 19:38, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Video games-related deletion discussions .  QuietCicada chirp 19:38, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Sadly non-notable, the PC Gamer is the only source of significant coverage from a WP:VG/S type source.  ＶＲＸＣＥＳ ( talk ) 08:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Doesn't appear to pass GNG for the article.  While the PCGamer source would be sufficient for mentioning in articles like List of freeware video games.  IgelRM ( talk ) 23:02, 25 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
Benjamín Rivera (actor): I was unable to find sources to verify it.  This has been in CAT:NN for 14 years; hopefully we can now resolve it.  Boleyn ( talk ) 15:06, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Mexico .  Eastmain ( talk • contribs ) 16:07, 17 January 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!  06:58, 24 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
Dayamis Chinea: I am unable to find sufficient in-depth coverage from third-party sources, failing WP:GNG .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 01:36, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women , Football ,  and Cuba .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 01:36, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per the nomination.  IncompA 01:57, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:06, 12 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 13:23, 13 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
DIRT (band): Tagged over 3 years ago with no improvement (!make that 13 years ago ).  Defunct band, unlikely to generate in-depth third-party coverage in the future.  JFHJr ( ㊟ ) 23:37, 15 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England .  Shellwood ( talk ) 00:31, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Aintabli ( talk ) 04:49, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] DELETE per nom.  fails WP:BAND cannot find any mentions except for a few blogs.  Wafflesvarrg ( talk ) 14:00, 22 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
FLY91: Last AfD resulted in DRAFTIFY as an WP:ATD .  Moved from draft space by only keep vote from last AfD.  References added (other than Twitter) are announcements around it leasing aircraft on its way to launch.  Still WP:TOOSOON and the churnalism doesn't add up to significant coverage.  CNMall41 ( talk ) 18:58, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Aviation ,  and India .  CNMall41 ( talk ) 19:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:02, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Transportation-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:03, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Goa-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:03, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] pinging previous participants as this was fairly recent - @ Thewikizoomer : , @ S5A-0043 : , @ MrSchimpf : , @ Siroxo : . -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 19:05, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Unchanged from previous vote! ; they may have leased an aircraft, but until it has a place to go and ticketed passengers, this still is not an active airline in any sense.  Nate • ( chatter ) 19:10, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Although there is some news, I agree that it may be WP:TOOSOON .  Royal88888 ( talk ) 21:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete/Draftify .  Still WP:TOOSOON .  S5A-0043 Talk 11:28, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The airline already has it's first plane VT-NUT running test proving flights in India.  I do not think it is too soon or worthy of deletion.  Aircraft was delivered 2 days ago and is leased from Mumbai based VMAN leasing.  Article definitely needs to be updated with the latest info.  The first aircraft is an ex-TruJet ATR 72-600.  Mkkm2112 ( talk ) 16:24, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Its first plane* (sorry - autocorrect) Mkkm2112 ( talk ) 16:25, 23 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Based on the previous draftify, and the fact creator just attempted to draftify again after this discussion began, I think that would be the opposite of what needs to happen.  I would actually recommend SALTing.  -- CNMall41 ( talk ) 18:21, 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
Saltora Dr.BC. Vidyapith: Suggest delete unless there is something notable Newhaven lad ( talk ) 18:41, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Schools , India ,  and West Bengal .  Owen× ☎ 19:06, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Fails general notability guidelines and does not warrant a page on the school.  School has not been the subject of significant coverage.  No reliable independent sources found on it with even any basic coverage of background.  RangersRus ( talk ) 13:49, 22 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:13, 23 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
Paolo Bellucci: [5] Angelo ( talk ) 23:35, 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 ) 23:35, 28 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 01:24, 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 fails WP:GNG . -- Tumbuka Arch ( talk ) 12:14, 30 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , does not meet the WP:BIO and WP:GNG . -- Micheal Kaluba • has spoken 20:22, 2 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
Lyndon Hartnick: JTtheOG ( talk ) 17:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Rugby union ,  and South Africa .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 17:12, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Other than this struggling to find GNG passing coverage.  No suitable redirect per WP:ATD .  Rugbyfan22 ( talk ) 18:56, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Easily fails notability guidelines.  Go4thProsper ( talk ) 21:14, 16 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