hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Łuszczów-Kolonia, Hrubieszów County: Hey man im josh ( talk ) 12:04, 14 July 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 July 17 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 17:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : (1) a kolonia is a legally recognized place under Polish law, so this is a populated, legally recognized place meeting the current wording of WP:NGEO ; (2) while this article is a bit underdeveloped pl:Łuszczów-Kolonia (powiat hrubieszowski) has enough content as to be well within our remit as a encyclopedia and gazetteer ; (3) I am seeing considerable discussion of the kolonia in books and articles discussing the WiN guerrilla organization in the postwar period, e.g. reports of this recent ceremony memorializing the Zarzyckis who were executed for sheltering WiN guerrillas there, so this can also meet the "sufficient sources to provide more information than a database entry" threshold (my paraphrase) that has recently been proposed as an update to NGEO.  Applying the rules flexibly in accordance with our encyclopedic purpose, I think that this falls within both the letter and the spirit of NGEO.  -- Visviva ( talk ) 04:43, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge . Normally I support the retention of articles on separate settlements, but as far as I can see this is just a few houses at one end of Łuszczów , itself a very small village spread out along a road. Nothing that I can see distinguishes it from the 'main' village, not even a road sign. It is not even "located away from previously existing buildings", but no further away than the other parts of the village. -- Necrothesp ( talk ) 14:45, 18 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, C LYDE TALK TO ME / STUFF DONE (I will not see your reply if you don't mention me) 17:52, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep -- meets NGEO as a legally recognized populated place.  The corresponding article in Polish WP has more sources if more sources are desired, but they're not needed.  Central and Adams ( talk ) 18:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Gmina Uchanie has a list of villages and settlements where  Łuszczów-Kolonia is mentioned.  The article seems more complete with this.  WonderCanada ( talk ) 18:27, 24 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
Peter Nguyen Van Hung: I don't see notability; he is an activist but without major achievements.  Nadzik ( talk ) 10:15, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Taiwan and Vietnam .  Nadzik ( talk ) 10:15, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Christianity , Japan ,  and Australia .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep.  Google translate isn't giving me any help on the Chinese sources but the State Department and Taipei Times both look like significant coverage in reliable sources. — Moriwen ( talk ) 14:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] delete - see also Wikipedia:Long-term_abuse/Nipponese_Dog_Calvero .  Hoyanova ( talk ) 06:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] FYI ar:special:diff/66394263 ; requests to create the article on the Arabic Wikipedia.  (Please see GUC ) -- Alaa :). .!  15:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep – There is good sourcing, including the ones Moriwen raised, so this is fine.  Notability should be determined apart from LTA case / UPE or whatever.  TLA tlak 02:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, The Herald (Benison) ( talk ) 14:41, 20 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep : Mentioned in a few articles [13] , [14] , with probably the best here [15] , as human rights activist.  I think we have just enough basic coverage about the person.  A mention here [16] Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as per the reliable sources coverage identified in this discussion such as the Taipei Times, The Diplomat and others so that WP:GNG is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 ( talk ) 19:54, 24 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
Mark Grossman: BrigadierG ( talk ) 22:53, 26 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] But he has played one of the central roles in the most popular US soap opera for the past five years (which became an Emmy nomination).  Wikipedia has articles about actors with far fewer credits.  And I looked at his imdb pages and apparently he has also done film roles. -- Pisces ( talk ) 04:06, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:BEFORE .  One click and found lots of potential sources .  Bearian ( talk ) 13:40, 1 May 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The Google result sheet isn't exactly brimming with high-quality sources, but the nomination statement doesn't even contain a reason for deletion (we have plenty of pages for actors who have never been Emmy nominated), hence keep.  Geschichte ( talk ) 10:14, 2 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
Holawaka: Paul Vaurie ( talk ) 17:07, 31 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Mythology and Ethiopia .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:29, 31 March 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge to Waaqeffanna , of which Oromo mythology is a sub-topic, or Somali mythology .  I've seen the story of Holawaka attested in many secondary sources, but have seen not much analysis, so a merge seems the best solution to me.  Daranios ( talk ) 13:49, 2 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I can only see a snippet from The Macmillan Illustrated Encyclopedia of Myths & Legends .  If it contains enough commentary to expand the article beyond a stub, I am fine with keep , too.  Daranios ( talk ) 20:29, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Salvio giuliano 21:42, 7 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep A quick WP:BEFORE search brings up dozens of sources, way more than enough to demonstrate notability.  Pladica ( talk ) 4:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC) Keep per WP:BEFORE , in concurrence with Pladica .  See in this list of snippets of books .  Bearian ( talk ) 14:20, 14 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge Based on the current sources.  Happy to reconsider if more sources are found.  MrsSnoozyTurtle 05:44, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Courcelles ( talk ) 14:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Article needs development, but Bearian's BEFORE shows there is SIGCOV available in RS.  // Timothy :: talk 04:37, 19 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep A notable mythological creature.  The article requires expansion, not deletion.  [14] can be used to expand the article. .  49.237.39.216 ( talk ) 00:24, 22 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per WP:NEXIST , sources have been provided by the AfD participants.  Lightburst ( talk ) 01:05, 23 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
Bill Freyer: The article fails both WP:GNG and WP:NSPORT .  There are no references and the two external links are stat sites.  The one note leads to a book entitled "The Encyclopedia of AFL Footballers: every AFL/VFL player since 1897", which seems pretty useless for notability and remarkably similar to the aforementioned stat sites.  IncompA 01:09, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Australia .  IncompA 01:09, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  The ongoing crusade against the uncultured sportsmen.  Clearly passed the stupidly deleted NAFL.  Unclear why inclusion in an encyclopaedia is useless for the inclusion in an encyclopaedia.  Nothing controversial and/or unverified.  Can't pretend we have to be careful about BLPs because he died over 60 years ago.  Funny how nom claims there are no references, did they even look at the page before nominating it.  duffbeerforme ( talk ) 03:57, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Any VFL player should be notable, even as perma-stubs, as there are print encyclopedias dedicated to their existence and therefore they have been "worthy of note."  Also has multiple references.  Needs improvement, not deletion.  SportingFlyer T · C 11:28, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I've expanded the article with many sources from Trove, an Australian newspaper archive.  Some are passing mentions but there's enough to clear GNG – I would single out these pieces [65] [66] [67] [68] if we're looking for the best .  I'm not really convinced the nominator did his due diligence here.  When you're evaluating notability, it's not enough to look merely at the sources currently in the article.  You have to thoroughly search where sources are likely to exist.  And even though NAFL has been demoted from guideline status and no longer grants presumed notability, it remains a useful rule of thumb for when you should take more care to see what coverage is out there.  – Tera tix ₵ 22:02, 14 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Many SNGs were problematic, but NAFL is pretty spot on - if you played in the AFL/VFL, you are almost certainly wiki-notable, because sources will cover you.  SportingFlyer T · C 15:27, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Really?  You think every single AFL/VFL passes Wikipedia's notability requirements?  Even one-gamers?  BeanieFan11 ( talk ) 15:47, 15 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Perhaps older one-gamers might not, but the competition has been covered so well for so long - especially considering playing lists have been pretty much fixed before the season starts - that it would be surprising to me if any failed, similar to American baseball and basketball pro leagues.  SportingFlyer T · C 16:35, 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: keep
Baham Museum: LibStar ( talk ) 00:32, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep I’ve added four refs.  There’s more.  Mccapra ( talk ) 03:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Whilst new sources are welcome, I'm not sure they meet WP:SIGCOV : - This one [55] has a single mention of Baham in 11 pages.  No, it describes the background and context of the creation of museums in Cameroon, makes clear why this particular region was important, and describes how and why this museum (and others) were established.  Mccapra ( talk ) 06:24, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] - This one [56] is merely a book sale listing from the catalogue of the museum.  Yes it shows that the museum has a published scholarly catalogue Mccapra ( talk ) 06:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] - This one [57] appears to be small 1 line mentions 3 or 4 times of the museum.  LibStar ( talk ) 04:19, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The article is about four museums in Cameroon, one of which is this one.  It is discussing what they have in common so literally the entire article is about it and its three sister museums.  Mccapra ( talk ) 06:20, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Cameroon-related deletion discussions .  LibStar ( talk ) 04:53, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions .  LibStar ( talk ) 04:55, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep as sources have been found by Mccapra .  Yes, we can be all pernickity and complain that the sources don't discuss these museums in the depth we would expect of a Western developed source discussing a Western major regional museum, but we're doing a big disservice to museums and the spread of human knowledge if we delete without judging the institution in its regional context.  There is no benefit to our reader or to Wikipedia in deleting this article, and there is hope that, in time, it will grow and contribute to an area that Wikipedia currently covers rather poorly.  Elemimele ( talk ) 08:01, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - in addition to the sources already mentioned, there is an UCLA PhD thesis by Erica Perlmutter Jones on The Multiple Lives of Objects: Museum, Memory, and Modernity in the Cameroon Grassfields which discusses the Baham and the Babungo Museums in detail.  Chiswick Chap ( talk ) 18:56, 13 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per sources identified by

Discussion outcome: keep
Moominvalley: Much of this is unsourced and original research.  I also reviewed the corresponding Finnish article and it has insufficient reliable secondary sources to generate SIGCOV.  Sources do not say much more than this being the home of the Moomins .  Jontesta ( talk ) 21:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions .  Jontesta ( talk ) 21:31, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep Per WP:NEXIST .  According to sources, at least in Europe, Moominvalley is about as iconic as Narnia rather than mere fancruft.  There is even a museum based on it.  I have found SIGCOV in 3 book sources so far, Children's Literature Comes of Age , the Oxford Encyclopedia of Children's Literature , and Literary Wonderlands , so it already passes GNG and I am sure many more such sources exist.  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 09:08, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment .  The Swedish Wikipedia has another book, which according to the title might be about the universe as a whole or the location: Westin, Boel (1988).  Familjen i dalen: Tove Janssons muminvärld.  Stockholm: Bonnier.  ISBN 91-0-047460-6 .  Geschichte ( talk ) 11:28, 13 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Zxcvbnm's sourcing.  Jclemens ( talk ) 23:55, 14 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
Frank Boyd: The only references are databases.   The special notability guideline for baseball has been removed, so that general notability is required but lacking.  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 23:16, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Baseball ,  and Ohio .  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 23:16, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep What sort of WP:BEFORE did you do?  Because if it's just Google, of course someone who played in the 1890s isn't going to have many results.  On Newspapers.com , in just a few minutes, I found an obit and a funeral notice .  And here's a handful more: [1] [2] [3] I presume that there's enough out there to establish notability.  – Muboshgu ( talk ) 23:57, 17 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per Muboshgu's sources plus here is another source that also has its own reference list.  Plus he has an extensive bio in Nemec's The Rank and File of 19th Century Major League Baseball .   The old NSPORT may be deprecated, but virtually all Major League players, especially beyond 1890 or so, meet GNG.  Rlendog ( talk ) 19:06, 19 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep per the nice work done by User:Muboshgu and User:Rlendog above.  -- A. B. ( talk • contribs • global count ) 15:42, 23 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: keep
Karen Bartleson: Does not meet WP:GNG Sabih omar 07:00, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : we could claim some notability since she was the IEEE president from 2017 to 2018.  The IEEE official website shows that she has some publications, which is confirmed here at Google Scholar .  Thus I think she satisfies WP:NACADEMIC by The person has held a highest-level elected or appointed administrative post at a major academic institution or major academic society.  ... and this article could add a lot of reliable sources by the academic papers she authored or co-authored.  Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather ( talk ) 07:08, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Businesspeople , Engineering ,  and United States of America .  — Karnataka talk 07:15, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 20:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep As per TheLonelyPather, I believe that the IEEE presidency meets WP:NACADEMIC #4.  I'm happy to reconsider my ! vote if this is an incorrect interpretation.  MrsSnoozyTurtle 02:51, 5 August 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  A person doesn't usually inherit notability from working for a notable organization, but IEEEE President is good enough considering the rest.  Suitskvarts ( talk ) 04:31, 7 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: keep
2025 Rugby League World Cup: This is an article about an event/tournament that will not now take place; it has been cancelled/postponed to the following year, where it will take place in a different country.  While there are references, many of them are effectively obsolete - "the event will take place", "France is bidding to become host", etc. I do not believe the article will pass the 10-year-test.  Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!  15:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Rugby league-related deletion discussions .  Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!  15:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as nom.  Bastun Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!  15:21, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 15:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : The article is well sourced with significant secondary coverage.  The International Rugby League has made it official that the 2026 Rugby League World Cup is a separate event so it wouldn't make any sense from a reader search point of view to move the material on the 2025 page to the 2026 page if people are specifically searching for 2025 information.  In addition, there is the possibility that if this information was included on the 2026 page, it may detract from the 2026 page itself.  However if the information could be successfully intergrated, I would Support a redirect to a subsection on the 2026 Rugby League World Cup page.  Mn1548 ( talk ) 15:46, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note the Rugby League WikiProject discussion on this issue.  Mn1548 ( talk ) 15:46, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : It looks to pass notability and is generally well sourced.  In contrast to the postponement of 2021 event, 2025 can be seen as separate from the 2026 world cup so merging it to the 2026 article does not seem the best option - that article will eventually become much larger and so would likely lead to issues over whether to remove or re-split the 2025 content.  EdwardUK ( talk ) 18:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : 2025's World Cup is separate to the 2026 World Cup and has coverage Rusty4321 talk contribs 00:57, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : We have articles on constitutional amendments that were never passed, and indeed that came nowhere near as close to happening as this event did.  2026 is different and should stay different.  Nwhyte ( talk ) 09:35, 19 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: keep
Raage Anuraage: Tagged for notability since 2021.  Previous AfD ended in DELETE.  Donald D23 talk to me 01:03, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and India .  Donald D23 talk to me 01:03, 22 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - It is a very popular series.  Sources that are currently linked are clearly WP:NTV and WP:GNG pass sufficient WP:RS on this page.  Nilpriyo ( talk ) 12:57, 25 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 01:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Coverage exists and indicates clearly that this is a popular series, so not against keep ; opposing delete because at the very least redirect to List_of_programmes_broadcast_by_Zee_Bangla#Former_broadcast should be warranted in my view.  - My, oh my!  (Mushy Yank) 22:00, 2 December 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!  03:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Final relist.  Article can't be redirected to List of programmes broadcast by Zee Bangla as this page has been deleted.  An aside, popularity is only important in that it may mean that there is some SIGCOV of the article subject, in itself though it doesn't establish notability.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  03:26, 13 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep - These sources on this page have enough coverage.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.181.19.253 ( talk ) 08:06, 14 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