hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Didine Canon 16: Not meeting anything for musical notability, no charted singles, no awards won.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 04:22, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Algeria-related deletion discussions .  Oaktree b ( talk ) 04:22, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions .  Kpg jhp jm 04:29, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Greetings everyone!  I hope you're all doing well.  Since this is my first time in this kind of discussion, I'm not entirely sure where the appropriate place to post this is.  If my message is in the wrong section, please feel free to move it to the suitable one.  __ I've made updates to the articles by adding various sources.  There are 16 local sources, including Ennahar and others, as well as international press like " Radio France " and " Egypt Today. " The content mainly revolves around a rapper, who has achieved significant success.  His YouTube channel has garnered over a billion views, and he's also dominating the top charts on platforms like Spotify and Deezer in the North African region.  Additionally, he has acted in a successful series, and he is working with Netflix to produce a new series around his story.  When discussing awards, it's essential to consider the context of the African continent.  Unlike the United States, where rap is a major industry with numerous awards and festivals, Africa doesn't have such events until now.  Algeria, in particular, is predominantly known for its music style, RAI music, which receives most of the recognition and awards.  However, rap is a new and emerging genre in the region, and Didine Canon 16, is leading the way as the number one rapper in North Africa, supported by the numbers and the sources.  Regards Riad Salih ( talk ) 15:23, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Passes WP:BASIC for having wide news coverage.  Possibly he may have some chart rankings based on provided info, but I have not researched it.  Naomijeans ( talk ) 17:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as has reliable sources coverage for WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 ( talk ) 23:21, 28 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as explained.  Riad Salih ( talk ) 15:27, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as explained. -- Panam2014 ( talk ) 12:25, 31 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: keep
Fluxion (electronic musician): No significant coverage in reliable sources.  Fails WP:MUSICBIO .  Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 23:49, 5 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Greece .  Jalen Folf (Bark[s]) 23:49, 5 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep has an AllMusic staff written bio here and four staff written album reviews here , here , here and here .  There is also coverage in XLR8R here .  Haven't done a full search yet, Atlantic306 ( talk ) 21:12, 6 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep moving to full keep after a full search which as well as the above mentioned sources found coverage in Exclaim here , Resident Advisor here , The Quitus here , and a Polish source here .  I'm not familiar with the Polish source but the other coverage is in reliable sources so I believe WP:GNG is passed so that deletion is unnecessary imv Atlantic306 ( talk ) 19:18, 9 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] UTC) Keep – it needs more refs but, given Atlantic306's success at finding some potential additions I'm pursuaded by the artist's discography.  -- Northernhenge ( talk ) 19:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Star Mississippi 02:00, 13 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: keep
2020–21 Wrexham A.F.C. season: Crowsus ( talk ) 22:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep The fully professional division rule no longer applies and there will be plenty of available sources that can be used to flesh out the article.  The National league is well covered even when teams don't commission their own documentary.  SportingFlyer T · C 00:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , this existence of the documentary covering this season essentially ensures notability, despite the fact they did not play in a professional division.  Esolo5002 ( talk ) 15:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 18:35, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - while the documentary only covers part of the season, there's enough coverage.  Giant Snowman 18:38, 15 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep We still have an SNG for NSEASONS, however with the events surrounding the season, there should be more than enough sources that can be added to bulk it up.  The article needs a clean up for sure.  Govvy ( talk ) 19:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per above.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 01:37, 21 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: keep
Knives Out (film series): Indagate ( talk ) 16:04, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  Indagate ( talk ) 16:04, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep since the third film is in production, so it is across the threshold of being nearly-guaranteed to come out.  (In the film industry, until filming starts, the creation of a film is much less certain.)  This is why the third film has its own standalone article when it started filming.  We'd just be deleting this film series article to bring it back later.  Erik ( talk | contrib ) ( ping me ) 16:31, 27 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : There are two movies released, with the third now in production.  This is not at all uncommon to have an article, similar to how the third film has a page (see @ Erik : 's comments).  DisneyMetalhead ( talk ) 04:09, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : If the third movie has a page, then the series can have a page.  If you'd like to delete the third movie's page because of WP:CRYSTAL , then go and do that.  Toughpigs ( talk ) 04:11, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : While I agree with Indagate's rationale that this is still too soon and technically against the film series MOS, I see no harm in keeping it up now that it is here.  That in mind, @ DisneyMetalhead , it is typically best practice to have a talk page discussion at one of the main related articles (ie at Talk:Knives Out ) BEFORE submitting these types of drafts for an AfC, as AfC is not always aware of the film MOS guidelines, case in point, what we have here.  This article is definitely in need of major ref additions and cleanup throughout, which probably should have been squared away before a move, though those can always be rectified.  Trailblazer101 ( talk ) 04:31, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Expansion and/or additional refs/details can be added at any point in time.  I did not think it would be controversial at all to create a film article about the collective details of the film series as a whole.  DisneyMetalhead ( talk ) 04:46, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Third film is already in production and has it's own article.  Upcoming films incredibly rarely get canned once they've began shooting.  If the third film itself can already have an article I see no guideline reason why the film series can not.  ★Trekker ( talk ) 23:34, 28 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Deleting the article for a film series with two movies out and a third actively filming seems a bit hasty.   Many series follow this pattern.  The third movie even has its own page!   Filming has already begun, which makes cancellation very unlikely in the industry.  Waqar 💬 17:23, 1 July 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: keep
Sheena M. Joyce: Successful career, but not notable enough.  Has been in CAT:NN for 14 years.  Boleyn ( talk ) 19:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Surely an Emmy nomination, the best documentary prize at the Hollywood Film Awards and GLAAD Media Awards, IDFA PLAY Award for Best Music Documentary at the International Documentary Festival Amsterdam, and Roger Ebert's assessment of her film as among the annual best constitute "significant critical attention" per WP:FILMMAKER .   See here and here .  CCS81 ( talk ) 00:20, 10 February 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!  23:25, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep That first reference above has no byline.  It reads like a block of AI generated PR and nothing else.  Next time, don't post these on Afd.  There is lots of other coverage and recently.  Her Tomatometer rating on Rotten Tomatoes is very high, indicating a quality film maker.  scope_creep Talk 09:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  01:19, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : This article in The Philadelphia Citizen is a lengthy profile of Joyce.  The Variety article posted above is also very helpful.  Toughpigs ( talk ) 02:08, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep :  I've been adding much-needed sourcing to the filmography.   Very definitely notable in her field.  — Maile ( talk ) 15:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep in view of the reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion such as the Variety article and the Philadelphia Citizen piece, imv Atlantic306 ( talk ) 21:57, 27 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: keep
Aida Rybalko: PROD removed.  Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Women ,  and Lithuania .  Bgsu98 (Talk) 02:54, 10 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  Already PROD'd so Soft Deletion is not an option.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  04:14, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The subject person fulfills WP:GNG with several Lithuanian sources that have provided SIGCOV (See Kauno diena [36] and 15min [37] ).  Her personal life has also received a certain extent of media coverage (See Lrytas.lt [38] , 15min [39] , and Delfi [40] ). — Prince of Erebor （ The Book of Mazarbul ） 05:28, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The sources provided in this discussion each provide the necessary WP:SIGCOV from RS to meet the WP:GNG .  Let'srun ( talk ) 16:00, 17 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep - Article is in very poor condition (hence the weak—even though that's really a reason to improve vice delete), but the sources found are enough that WP:NEXIST to show she meets GNG vice NSKATE.  - 2pou ( talk ) 21:32, 17 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: keep
Matheus Machado (footballer, born 2003): signed, Rosguill talk 17:54, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football , Belgium ,  and Brazil .  signed, Rosguill talk 17:54, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:06, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , found this [15] and was able to ascertain that it's in-depth direct coverage.  Geschichte ( talk ) 20:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Drafify - not currently notable, but might be in future.  Giant Snowman 19:07, 15 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – There sufficient coverage to establish WP:GNG [16] [17] [18] .  Svartner ( talk ) 20:20, 16 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : per above, some good commentary on the footballer's football work Password (talk) (contribs) 06:15, 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: keep
Soverel 33: Single reference is a 404 error to a database.  Fails the general and product-specific notability policies.  - UtherSRG (talk) 14:46, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Products-related deletion discussions .  UtherSRG (talk) 14:46, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Gbooks has enough coverage to verify the specs, from a period magazine [7] , this is a discussion of the boat [8] under the rather hopeful title of "Stocking Stuffers".  Should be ok.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:23, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I'm surprised at your ! vote, Oaktree.  Specs are just a listing, so not WP:SIGCOV , and the discussion is also failing that quality.  - UtherSRG (talk) 15:26, 3 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It does have two full pages of specs, they seem rather detailed, I'd consider them significant coverage.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 15:33, 4 October 2023 (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 ) 15:04, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the above sources and these additional newspaper sources: "5-race weekend series is a Soverel showcase" .  South Florida Sun Sentinel .  1985-12-12.  p. 52 .  Retrieved 2023-10-10 .  "Soverel's success comes by design" .  The Miami Herald .  1984-02-26.  p. 315 .  Retrieved 2023-10-10 .  "Sea beckened Stuart sailor, designer at an early age" .  The Stuart News .  1985-12-13.  p. 21 .  Retrieved 2023-10-10 .  I'd expect additional coverage to be available in specialty periodicals of the period, which are unlikely to be accessible online.  Jfire ( talk ) 22:37, 10 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Sailboatdata (the only refrence in the article) is not reliable.  However, the sources found by Jfire leads me to vote keep.  -- Mike 🗩 17:38, 11 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - sources found by Jfire.  The stub can be improved and I hope that someone adds the sources.  Lightburst ( talk ) 21:03, 11 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: keep
Brandon Stickney: The reason for nomination was: 'Fails the general and author-specific notability policies.'  I couldn't come up with evidence to disagree.  The last AfD had only one person commenting and no votes, so hopefully a better discussion can result in a decision this time.  Boleyn ( talk ) 16:29, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Authors , Journalism ,  and United States of America .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 16:39, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 16:56, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I found a review of Stickney's McVeigh book in Publishers Weekly ( link ) and a review of his prison memoir in Kirkus ( link ).  In addition, I found additional coverage of his work in the Buffalo News ( link ), WBFO ( link ), and the Union Sun and Journal ( link ) along with additional reviews in Booklist and the journal Social Thought & Research (these last two can be found through the Wikipedia Library).  When all of this is added with the coverage detailed by Espresso Addict in the previous AfD , I believe this subject meets the criteria at WP:Author . -- SouthernNights ( talk ) 14:42, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep , per SouthernNights' findings and my own from the previous AfD, in which I was also inclined to keep.  Espresso Addict ( talk ) 00:56, 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: keep
Kobeigane Divisional Secretariat: Shellwood ( talk ) 09:10, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep not a tautology.  Satisfies WP:NORG , as the third tier of public administration in Sri Lanka, Divisional Secreteriats are notable.  Independent reliable secondary sources provided.  Dan arndt ( talk ) 23:31, 22 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Speedy keep .  Nomination lacks any trace of effort, not even containing a capital letter or a full stop, and does not invoke any Wikipedia policy.  Geschichte ( talk ) 14:38, 23 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: keep
Václav Sršeň: Joeykai ( talk ) 18:43, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The page needs to be rewritten, not deleted.  Cswiki lists literature from which to draw so reliable sources exist.  FromCzech ( talk ) 20:42, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  His career was a lot longer than the article lets on, 16 years .  Geschichte ( talk ) 20:47, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  I have added a second source which confirms he played over 200 top-level matches in Czechoslovakia in a career spanning from 1942 to 1958.  C 679 06:56, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 11:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources above which show notability.  Giant Snowman 17:35, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources above.  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 18:34, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Seems obvious given the source provided above and the numerous substantial sources in the article.  Not sure why this one was tagged.  Anwegmann ( talk ) 00:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - He has an international cap therefore he is undoubtedly notable.  IJA ( talk ) 10:37, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] That statement is not supported by our notability guidelines at Wikipedia:Notability (sports) .  Robby.is.on ( talk ) 09:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep Seems to have something there, but without knowing whats in the books etc, it's hard to determine.  But based on the amount of football he played, I wouldn't be surprised if there are other sources out there.  Govvy ( talk ) 09:12, 20 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak Keep .  The book sources, which we cannot access, appear to have a good chance of being significant coverage.  Considering the subject (200+ top-level matches, national team member), I'd lean towards keeping.  BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 01:36, 22 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: keep
MaXXXine: Either way, though, I have a do not delete stance since it can be sent back to draft for now, should consensus lean against keeping.  - 2pou ( talk ) 20:27, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as there are now multiple reliable sources that have stated that principal photography has commenced.  I have added a number of them to the article.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by DisneyMetalhead ( talk • contribs ) 02:19, April 13, 2023 (UTC) The criteria for unreleased films that have already started principal photography is stated at WP:NFF , which says: films that have already begun shooting, but have not yet been publicly released (theatres or video), should generally not have their own articles unless the production itself is notable per the notability guidelines .  — Archer1234 ( t · c ) 03:04, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify .  May return to mainspace after it receives enough coverage and is released.  Aintabli ( talk ) 06:30, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] UTC) Keep - well sourced, notable.  TheMovieGuy Keep Filming has started, no point in transfering it to draft now since the sources pass GNG.  ★Trekker ( talk ) 12:35, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I agree.  24.52.114.138 ( talk ) 13:21, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] How does it satisfy WP:NFF ?   — Archer1234 ( t · c ) 13:36, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Draft per the rules stated above.  Andrzejbanas ( talk ) 23:43, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .   Filming has started and there are enough sources to pass WP:GNG .   Little point in draftifying now.  -- wooden superman 10:26, 17 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep with several new sources added, including sources on the production.  - WikiPete18 ( talk ) 19:05, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Please, the filming is still ongoing.  CastJared ( talk ) 10:48, 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: keep