hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Kido Blanko: He is not a notable act in the Nigerian music industry.  None of the sources cited in the article are not independent of him; they are all interviews.  None of the subject's music has been crticially reviewed or charted on any country's official music chart.  The subject has released an extended play but it isn't notable.  The article is written in a promotional tone and was previously deleted via an AFD discussion.  Versace 1608 Wanna Talk ?  01:38, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Bands and musicians ,  and Nigeria .  Versace 1608 Wanna Talk ?  01:38, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong delete and salt, G11 if possible.  .  This absolutely should not have been moved from the Draft namespace.  Highly promotional content about a subject who does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:NMUSIC .  There is also likely some undisclosed paid editing involved here.  -- Kinu t / c 03:59, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Article should not have been moved out of draft. A couple of the sources appear to be good but on further investigation they don't appear to be independent. I was unable to find sources to rescue this article but if some appear please ping me. I recognize that there could be sources that exist that I don't know about or have access to. Dr vulpes ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:33, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – no sources that are independent and secondary, and it looks like the sources have been randomly added to the text because many of them don't verify the content. No sign of his meeting WP:MUSICBIO or WP:BASIC . -- bonadea contributions talk 12:43, 20 April 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment FWIW I've removed the advertising and did a little CE'ing, though I dont expect this to survive AFD.  Googleguy007 ( talk ) 19:33, 20 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
MDT Sporting Goods: As always, companies are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist, and have to pass certain specific notability criteria -- the most important and non-negotiable of which is that the quality and range of their sourceability would pass WP:GNG and WP:CORPDEPTH .  But of the three footnotes here, one is a Q&A interview in which the company's CEO is talking about himself on a non-notable blog, which is not support for notability at all -- and the other two are special-interest gun enthusiast publications, which appear to be acceptable for use but are not widely-distributed enough to get this over the bar all by themselves if they're all the coverage this company has.  Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt this company from having to have more than just two hits of coverage in special-interest magazines.  Bearcat ( talk ) 16:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Canada .  Bearcat ( talk ) 16:08, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 16:45, 24 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Promo - No claim or references for notability.  Llajwa ( talk ) 14:40, 28 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
2024 Turkish hostage crisis: Ecrusized ( talk ) 11:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Crime and Turkey .  Shellwood ( talk ) 12:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 16:31, 5 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Israel–Hamas war protests : WP:NOTNEWS but may be shortly mentioned in this article with a greater focus.  The content in Israel–Hamas war protests#Turkey may be split to form Israel–Hamas war protests in Turkey .  No prejudice to deletion.  Aintabli ( talk ) 08:06, 10 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - does not meet notability in any way, and we are not a news outlet, although I won’t oppose a very selective merge.  Bearian ( talk ) 00:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 13:03, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete WP:NOTNEWS .  LibStar ( talk ) 16:54, 12 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete WP:NOTNEWS .  Bondegezou ( talk ) 22:35, 12 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: delete
Noon (company): Refs are routine business news.  Fails WP:SIRS , WP:CORPDEPTH scope_creep Talk 09:52, 2 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies , Websites ,  and Saudi Arabia .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 15:06, 2 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!  07:36, 9 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Dont delete improve it Jomaxwell ( talk ) 13:50, 9 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] A WP:SPA came in.  I will look at the references.  scope_creep Talk 13:55, 9 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Soft delete – Yeah, routine coverage.  WP:TOOSOON .  TLA (talk) 06:35, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Easy redirect to Public Investment Fund .  IgelRM ( talk ) 03:49, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting to assess argument on Redirect suggestion.  But I don't see a mention of the company at the proposed target article page nor mention of the investment fund on the company article so I'm not sure a Redirect makes sense.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  05:55, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per WP:TOOSOON .  Page could be recreated once the company attains more notability.  TH1980 ( talk ) 01:48, 21 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
Picture Perfect Hair Salon: There's a variety of things, but I don't think it has SIGCOV.  QuietCicada ( talk ) 02:48, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Video games and Fashion .  QuietCicada ( talk ) 02:48, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete WP:SIGCOV besides the Wired article does not appear to exist.  A single review does not demonstrate it passes WP:GNG .  ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ ( ᴛ ) 05:29, 16 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom and above fails WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 00:44, 23 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
Jaideep Saikia: Sourced to either non-independent primary sources such as profiles and articles authored by him or to sources that mention the subject in a trivial capacity, not much more than a name drop him.  WP:BEFORE search only brings up more of the same.  Tayi Arajakate Talk 05:18, 8 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People and India .  Tayi Arajakate Talk 05:18, 8 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Academics and educators , Authors , Terrorism ,  and Assam .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:57, 8 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The cited sources are announcements of upcoming lectures ( WP:ROUTINE ), self-published works or trivial mentions in the media.  Lacks significant coverage to pass WP:GNG .  Tutwakhamoe ( talk ) 02:30, 10 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I found a review of a book of which he was joint editor, but nothing else that could count towards notability.  Phil Bridger ( talk ) 20:34, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, ✗ plicit 05:33, 15 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Pars Paper Company: It was previously deleted for exactly this reason.  That it is mentioned as an abadi in the Iranian census is neither here nor there.  Plenty of factories around the world have dormitories where people live, and would be counted by the census, this does not make them "legally recognised, populated places" - that this is a temporary population is emphasised by the great reduction in population from 5,909 in 2006 to 2,546 in 2011 - they laid off part of their workforce!  Looking at the satellite photos , I'd love people to tell me where exactly the "village" is supposed to be here.  The relevant standard here, for a business, is WP:CORP , and the Pars Paper Company does not even nearly pass that standard - all that can be found are passing mentions of the strikes in May this year and their company website.  FOARP ( talk ) 08:51, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Iran-related deletion discussions .  FOARP ( talk ) 08:51, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies and Geography .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:33, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I appreciate my inclusion in the discussion for deletion of the article.  I have no issue with the elimination of the page based on your reasoning; it is solid.  There is a link from Hoseynabad Rural District (Shush County) indicating its status as the largest village in its rural district.  I'll update that reference, and if it exists in a list of populated places, I can remedy that at the same time.  I don't expect any objections to Pars Paper Company's removal; so absent any objection to the proposed action, carry on.  Thank you.  Brightkingdom ( talk ) 11:29, 18 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I agree with the reasoning above.  It is a company, not a village as evident from satellite photos and there aren't any references which meet GNG/NCORP criteria for establishing notability.  HighKing ++ 12:50, 25 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per the above.  If anything, there seems to be some confusion here with what the sources indicate... but this is plainly a company that doesn't meet NCORP .  Bestagon ⬡ 17:39, 25 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
Mobile secure gateway: The article and inbound links were all created by what appears to be a single purpose account .  There are essentially zero academic mentions of this term.  Brandon ( talk ) 06:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The article fails to establish notability within the computer security field.  It lacks sufficient coverage in academic and reliable sources, which is a key condition for inclusion on the platform.  This suggests it may be a trademark or a buzzword, not a recognised concept.  The creation of the article and related content by a single-purpose account raises doubts about the topic's neutrality and authenticity, as well as its importance and relevance. -- AstridMitch ( talk ) 07:20, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions .  Brandon ( talk ) 06:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:57, 11 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom.   This is one company's attempt to monetize a buzzword.  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 15:33, 11 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: delete
Johnnyphlo: Also article is really POV and flowery, poorly sourced.  toobigtokale ( talk ) 08:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and South Korea .  toobigtokale ( talk ) 08:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , United States of America ,  and New Jersey .  Skynxnex ( talk ) 14:38, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete : I found this: [12] , this [13] , and this [14] , but those are interviews and therefore not significant/secondary, and I'm not familiar with the reputations of the sources.   If this does end up as a keep, it needs a complete rewrite as it is embarrassingly promotional in tone.  WeirdNAnnoyed ( talk ) 22:13, 26 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Only a source from Facebook which doesn't count for notability.  TheChineseGroundnut ( talk ) 22:56, 28 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
WWCG-LP: Let'srun ( talk ) 04:09, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Georgia (U.S. state) .  Let'srun ( talk ) 04:09, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Absolutely no SIGCOV.  The "licensed" rationale that carried the day in 2008 is no longer valid, and it never materialized into really anything other than a record in some FCC files.  Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c ) 18:55, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : it seems safe to say that if any significant coverage existed, it would have turned up by now.  I did want to note that this station changed its call sign in 2009 to WCGT-LP ; there was an expired PROD at that title in 2011.  (That was shortly after the end of a three-year period in which this article had been blanked and redirected to White Springs Television .)  If the article there was effectively about the same subject, would PROD even have been valid because this was after the 2008 AfD (and oy, you can really tell it was a pre-2021 deletion discussion on a broadcast station, with the lower standards that would not be considered "policy-based" now)?  (And would any refund really be worth it just to go through the motions of another deletion discussion?)  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:37, 14 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
Haely Jardas: Fails WP:GNG .  Let'srun ( talk ) 01:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Women , Beauty pageants ,  and Washington, D.C. .  Let'srun ( talk ) 01:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : This is all I can find [14] , not enough to keep the article.  What's used now as sourcing is PR items or lists from the various pageant websites.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : She graduated in journalism and works for the Parks and Rec department, nothing of which help notability.  Appears just another working individual.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 02:38, 31 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Fails WP:BIO , couldn't find any significant, independent coverage.  Mooonswimmer 22:55, 6 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
Minolta STF 135mm f/2.8 T4.5: Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:40, 11 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
Grand Isle, Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana: Possible WP:ATD is merge/redirect to Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana but I am not sure if it would be helpful to a reader.  Boleyn ( talk ) 15:27, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Louisiana .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:30, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - It appears to be an Exxon oil processing terminal , within the Romere Pass oil and gas field.  You can see it clearly on satellite.   Nothing to suggest a populated place.  Magnolia677 ( talk ) 16:46, 18 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete can't find any historical sources for it either.  jengod ( talk ) 23:37, 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
SpiralScouts International: A search for sources only turned up primary sources or unreliable sources such as databases etc.  Lavalizard101 ( talk ) 17:39, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Scouting and Paganism .  Lavalizard101 ( talk ) 17:39, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Organizations and Washington .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:52, 19 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
Seimata Chilia: Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 15:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Oceania .  Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 15:04, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:10, 16 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 17:41, 16 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
Collective Phase One: One source cites only as a passing mention.  It also fails WP:ORG as a production house or organisation.  The Doom Patrol ( talk ) 18:51, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers , Arts ,  and Film .  The Doom Patrol ( talk ) 18:51, 22 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:48, 23 July 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!  22:47, 29 July 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak delete The references are an odd mix of interviews, profiles and movie reviews which have no reference to the apparent subject of the article, despite their claimed involvement in some of the films.  Weak delete because I cannot read Malayalam, so I cannot assess potential sources in that language, or read the organisation's Facebook page which is also linked.  Obviously the FB page wouldn't be a valid indicator of notability, but it might help establish what else there is out there about this group.  JohnmgKing ( talk ) 11:47, 3 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