hsuvaskakoty/wide_analysis huggingface dataset:
Equivalence principle (geometric): No content worth merging in to Equivalence principle .  Most of the text in the article seems to be from a 1994 arxiv preprint with 6 citations, 4 from the author of the preprint and 2 that to not mention the article topic.  The text seems to be very mathematical and what little there is makes no sense to me.  Johnjbarton ( talk ) 02:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions .  Johnjbarton ( talk ) 02:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions .  Adumbrativus ( talk ) 08:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  The unpublished preprint https://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/9405013 which this page summarizes is non-notable.  It seems the article was created by an editor with a COI.  Jähmefyysikko ( talk ) 09:44, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as not a notable physics topic.  XOR'easter ( talk ) 15:53, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  It's a strange point of view on equivalence principle , and I very much agree there is nothing here worth merging.  Adumbrativus ( talk ) 21:51, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  It is unclear who might benefit from reading this unsourced article, which is barely more than a stub.  Furthermore, I do not see any portion of this article which might usefully be merged into equivalence principle .  Prokaryotic Caspase Homolog ( talk ) 12:43, 30 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  While the author of the preprint has the Wikipedia page Gennadi Sardanashvily , both he and the original author of the page have passed away so I don't think it is salvageable.  If someone wants they can always recreate it later.  Ldm1954 ( talk ) 18:14, 31 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
Jarbi Álvarez: Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 03:17, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football ,  and Belize .  Sportsfan 1234 ( talk ) 03:17, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 07:42, 23 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 07:44, 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
Lycée Libanais Francophone Privé: A search for sources did not yield coverage to meet WP:NSCHOOL .  LibStar ( talk ) 23:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools , United Arab Emirates ,  and France .  LibStar ( talk ) 23:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Per nom.  DI V I N E 10:23, 19 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
Michael Aushenker: Aydoh8 ( talk | contribs ) 08:49, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Artists , United States of America ,  and New York .  Aydoh8 ( talk | contribs ) 08:49, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:45, 26 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete I'm not finding anything substantive about him.  I see that he has written for one or more possibly fringe publications.  There are quotes and cites to someone with that name in books about Hollywood, but I don't know if it's him because there isn't enough information to determine that.  Lamona ( talk ) 20:46, 30 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Not seeing any SIGCOV to establish notability.  Longhornsg ( talk ) 17:31, 1 July 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : While there's some information here, it doesn't quite meet the bar for an article.  Reliable sources like established publications would make a stronger case for keeping it.  Waqar 💬 15:49, 2 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
List of American collegiate athletic stadiums and arenas: The generic title of the list suggests the intention is for it to cover stadiums and arenas for all sports at all levels of college athletics.  Such a list would be too large to be practical.  Jweiss11 ( talk ) 19:13, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:32, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:32, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:32, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of American football-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:35, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Agreed per nom.  Only football stadiums currently listed and its too clunky/long already without basketball, baseball or other sports as well.  Epluribusunumyall ( talk ) 20:46, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : per nom, redundant to those pages and otherwise too broad.  Reywas92 Talk 20:48, 19 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per nom.  Joseph 2302 ( talk ) 08:02, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Subject is far too broad for a standalone article.  User:Let'srun 02:25, 21 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
Wayne McDonald (businessman): Writing a long undergrad thesis is not a claim of importance.  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 03:08, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bodybuilding and Australia .  Walsh90210 ( talk ) 03:08, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong delete what a vanity article.  Full of primary sources.  Only 1 article links to this List of Australian businesspeople .  LibStar ( talk ) 06:26, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:48, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete: Article's sources are mostly primary, and reads pretty biased.  Also doesn't appear to be notable enough, anyway.  The fact that the leading sentence includes an external link to their website screams advertisement .  — Mjks28 ( talk ) 11:40, 25 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Abhilash Pillai (film writer): Has been moved to *and* from draft space multiple times by various UPE socks, so let's have a community decision.  UtherSRG (talk) 00:17, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and India .  UtherSRG (talk) 00:17, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Strong Delete : It's just too many socks.  Agreed with UtherSRG.  CastJared ( talk ) 00:40, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete The subject Has not had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions; or has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.  Isn’t a notable actor or script writer.  The socks make it even more of a reason to delete.  - 🔥 𝑰𝒍𝒍𝒖𝒔𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝑭𝒍𝒂𝒎𝒆 (𝒕𝒂𝒍𝒌) 🔥 00:46, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Most sources are in Malayam, and I'm not familiar which are in RS. I can't find coverage for this individual.  Oaktree b ( talk ) 01:11, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Kerala-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 08:15, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete most of them are not reliable sources and created many accounts -- Monhiroe ( talk ) 10:24, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Monhiroe.  Additionally, many of the editors there are blocked.  🛧 Layah50♪ 🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！ ) 21:21, 12 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and SALT as well: most of the coverage based on the movie Malikappuram.  Given the history of UPE socking involved, salting would prevent any more bad attempt of recreation.  202.83.41.48 ( talk ) 19:21, 17 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete fails WP:GNG .  Pharaoh of the Wizards ( talk ) 11:02, 18 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
Joanderson Brito: There are sources that talk about subject  fight info and there are considered routine sport/fight record and can not be use to meet WP:N .  Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Martial arts and Brazil .  Cassiopeia talk 21:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions .  Cassiopeia talk 21:44, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions .  Shellwood ( talk ) 21:47, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete premature creation,  doesn't meet GNG or NMMA Nswix ( talk ) 22:24, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete as per nom and WP:TOOSOON .  Lethweimaster ( talk ) 11:54, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete My search found lots of ghits, but not lots of significant independent coverage.   He hasn't yet met WP:NMMA .   He may well become notable, but he doesn't yet appear to meet any WP notability criteria.  Papaursa ( talk ) 01:35, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete – Fails in WP:GNG , poorly sourced.  Svartner ( talk ) 17:29, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per above -- Lenticel ( talk ) 00:06, 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
Jepthe Francois: JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:46, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople , Football , United Kingdom ,  and Caribbean .  JTtheOG ( talk ) 20:46, 21 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football 's list of association football-related deletions.  Giant Snowman 10:05, 22 June 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no evidence of notability.  If sources are found please ping me.  Giant Snowman 10:08, 22 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: delete
Tony Curzon Price: No particular claim to notability is textually clear.  JFHJr ( ㊟ ) 03:49, 5 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople , Journalism , Politics , Economics ,  and England .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 04:30, 5 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep per The Telegraph (well beyond the Wikipedia:One hundred words suggestion for SIGCOV) and because we usually set the bar a little lower for sources that we might cite.  (BTW, JFHJr , it's not necessary for an article to have a "particular claim to notability".  Were you thinking about Wikipedia:Credible claim of significance , which is a WP:CSD thing?)  WhatamIdoing ( talk ) 03:44, 10 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] No particular claim to notability is in regards to finding a more specific criterion than GNG.  Where are the multiple independent (unrelated to the subject) reliable sources providing significant coverage?  JFHJr ( ㊟ ) 03:51, 10 June 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!  03:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete There is the one Telegraph article, but everything else that I find is non-independent.  I find only a few academic articles and the citation counts are low (barely double and often single digits, one at 166 cites).  Lamona ( talk ) 02:13, 16 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Doczilla Ohhhhhh, no!  04:42, 19 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
Muhammad Abdul Malek: - AlbeitPK ( talk ) 18:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People , Islam ,  and Bangladesh .  AlbeitPK ( talk ) 18:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 19:02, 4 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  21:43, 11 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Jake Wartenberg ( talk ) 14:21, 18 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom, non-notable scholar.  Vinegarymass911 ( talk ) 12:24, 21 June 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Failed WP:GNG .  Youknowwhoistheman ( talk ) 06:52, 24 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
Shree Chandrodaya Higher Secondary School: Still zero evidence of notability.  * Pppery * it has begun... 15:08, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Question : have you performed BP:BEFORE, including a search for local print sources?  Jack4576 ( talk ) 15:30, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education , Schools ,  and Nepal .  Shellwood ( talk ) 15:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, RL0919 ( talk ) 16:35, 21 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Extraordinary Writ ( talk ) 00:21, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No sources found in gnews or gbooks.  Fails WP:NSCHOOL .  LibStar ( talk ) 04:25, 29 May 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - no decent coverage found, even when searching "चन्द्रोदय उच्च मा.बि तथा बहुमुखी क्याम्पस" Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 09:32, 29 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
2024 French-Russian Aerial incident: No lasting effects, no sustained coverage – and indeed the very existence of the incident is denied by one of the parties.  Rosbif73 ( talk ) 08:41, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military , Aviation , France ,  and Russia .  Rosbif73 ( talk ) 08:41, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete ludicrously labelled Russian "victory" per nom.  Three French aircraft were allegedly turned back after allegedly entering Russian airspace.  Crack open the champagne and stage a victory parade, Ivan!  Clarityfiend ( talk ) 09:02, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 10:42, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Support WP:NOTNEWS and WP:EVENTCRITERIA .  Fails WP:SUSTAINED , WP:GNG and fails WP:LASTING .  The Russian victory stated is very dubious as one party even denies an incident happened.  Not particularly noteworthy of an article.  Aviationwikiflight ( talk ) 13:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete What a confusing article.   "Russian victory" in the sense that France didn't violate their airspace and were 40 kilometres away?  Obviously this article about a non-existent incident fails every notability policy imaginable.  AusLondonder ( talk ) 15:58, 25 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I too am confused.  How does one "violate international airspace"?  Surely the whole point of international airspace is that it can't be violated?  Phil Bridger ( talk ) 17:26, 29 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Same situation as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/March 2024 Polish airspace violation : this event is not notable in the larger course of the war, and, as per above, fails WP:NOTNEWS .  Gödel2200 ( talk ) 13:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The "victory" earned by Russia isn't even a victory, the French planes didn't want to be involved in conflict.  I would presume the Russians didn't want to do the same because of NATO's Article 5 , so a removal of the article probably is best.  70.167.194.163 ( talk ) 18:14, 27 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: delete
Hackett, Kansas: We need some real evidence of a settlement, not just name drops in a local newspaper, and at present all we have are entries in listings.  Mangoe ( talk ) 21:36, 26 December 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 December 26 .   — cyberbot I Talk to my owner :Online 21:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Geography and Kansas .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 22:23, 26 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : This page has been included in a bundle discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bowling Green, Kansas .  Significa liberdade (she/her) ( talk ) 00:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : The article itself says the post office was only there for three years.  What possibly could have happened in three years?  James.folsom ( talk ) 08:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Commnet : Hackett Kansas has been removed from the national maps database, so ref 1 is a broken link now.  I'm removing that reference.  James.folsom ( talk ) 15:57, 28 December 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : The USGS no longer has a record of this site, so we only have a list of post offices and user provided coords for the place.  I've looked for an hour+ in the Wikipedia libray and my own resources and can find no additional sources.  It's not legally recognized so it's not presumed notable, an it only had a post office for 3 years so it's not a long lasting place.  It simply cannot meet WP:NRV.  James.folsom ( talk ) 17:45, 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: delete
List of programmes broadcast by HTV: A massive unsourced programming guide, very very few wls, no CLN value, no sources showing this meets NLIST.  Nothing sourced to merge, no proper redirect target.  // Timothy :: talk 08:31, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Vietnam .  Delta space 42 ( talk • contribs ) 10:54, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions .  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 11:22, 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